LTE Handover Failure Examples and Troubleshooting

There are several reasons leading to LTE call drops. They vary from PHY layer issues all the
way to RRC related problems. Some of these factors are handover failures, RACH failures,
RLC unrecoverable errors, or misconfigured RRC parameters. In LTE, any of these air interface
failures leads to losing the radio link between the UE and the eNB, known as radio link
failure (RLF).
RLF does not necessarily cause a call drop, as there are methods to restore the connection
through a re-establishment procedure. If this procedure subsequently fails, then the call drops
and a new RRC connection is then required. Figure 3.40 illustrates the factors affecting RLF or
call drops. The figure shows a summary of procedures in each layer (timers and constants used
to detect RLF) and the call re-establishment procedures. It also lists some of the common reasons
for observing such failure of any of the layers (i.e., coverage, parameters, RF issues, etc.).

Besides the weak RF condition or coverage issues causing RLF, the other common reasons
are handover failures. Troubleshooting and optimizing handover success rate is essential in
ensuring a satisfactory end-user experience and stabilizing the network KPIs.
Similar to UMTS, the handover parameters can be one of the main reasons for RLF. In addition,
the neighbor list relations in LTE can also cause RLF and call drops. One commonly
missed neighbor relation problem is when the logical X2 interface has not been properly
defined between neighbor cells. These types of failures manifest themselves when the UE
keeps sending reports for event A3 without receiving a reply from the source eNB to trigger
a handover. In another situation, the handover failures occur when the eNB replies to the
UE report by sending RRC handover command messages to an incorrect target cell, due to
misconfigured neighbor relations over X2.
One case study of call drop troubleshooting is detailed in the following example. The case
describes an RLF that is observed in good RF conditions. Figure 3.41 shows a snippet of the
RF conditions of the LTE cells around the time of the RLF.
The RRC messages and the main call flow before and after the RLF are listed in Table 3.21.
The serving cell in this example is PCI 8 (physical cell identity), and the best neighbor cell
in the tested location is PCI 7. The UE finds that PCI 7 is better than serving PCI 8, and all the
handover parameters are fulfilled by the UE. Subsequently, the UE tries to send measurement
reports messages (MRMs) for event A3 to trigger the handover. At this time, the UE does not
have an uplink grant assigned in order to transmit the SRB packets. Hence, the UE sends the
PUCCH scheduling request (SR) to the eNB requesting an uplink grant. The UE keeps sending
PUCCH SRs but without any PDCCH grant assignment. Once the UE reaches the maximum
number of SR configured by the network (16 attempts in this configuration), it starts the RACH
procedure in an attempt to obtain the uplink grant. Therefore, the UE proceeds with RACH
MSG1 but does not receive MSG2 either. The UE repeats MSG1 for the maximum number of
retransmissions, configured as 10 in this network. By the end of this procedure, the UE detects
a RACH failure, and declares the RLF condition. The RLF condition leads the UE to move
to idle mode (loss of radio link with the eNB). The UE then tries a reestablishment procedure
described in the beginning of the section, and the call is finally recovered.
The detailed investigations of the issue with the related eNB traces have led to an unexpected
uplink interference being the reason for the RLF. This also confirms the previously described

Table 3.21 Call drop failure flow diagram

TimeStamp RRC message (UL:<)
(DL:>)
Message info
15:06:32.466 RRCconnectionreconfiguration > event A3 parameters configured
by eNB on PCI 8
15:06:32.469 RRCconnectionreconfiguration
complete
< UE and eNB will use the
parameters configured
15:06:33.191 systeminformationblockType1 > –
15:07:11.756 measurementreport < UE sends event A3 to report PCI
7 is better than serving cell PCI
8, according to the parameters
configured
– Grant requests by UE to eNB < Grant request procedure triggered
by UE but eNB does not assign
UE UL grant to send MRM
– Grant timer expires <
– LTE RACH ACCESS START < UE needs to start RACH process
15 : 07 : 11.947 RACH ACCESS FAILS – RACH fails after reaching
maximum number of attempts
without a reply from eNB
15:07:11.947 LTE RRC RADIO LINK
FAILURE
– UE triggers RL Failure
Call Drop < > Call drop indicated
15:07:12.189 systeminformationblockType1 > UE moves to idle mode and reads
SIB-1 on the best cell (PCI 7)
15:07:12.205 RRCconnectionreestablishment
request
< Call re-establishment process
succeeds and call recovered
15:07:12.232 RRCconnectionreestablishment >
call flow where the eNB is unable to reply to any uplink grant request from the UE. The
downlink conditions in this example case study are shown to be strong, but the uplink in this
case has been impacted by extra losses due to equipment issues.
Lastly, any RLF leads to significant end-user data interruption, and degradation in the network
retainability KPIs. While the reasons for call drops can vary in each deployment, this
section has shown methodologies that can be beneficial in troubleshooting similar problems.

Introduction to Cell Reselection

In general, for both LTE and UMTS, the UE adhere to the cell reselection rules based on
the parameters broadcast in the SIBs from the LTE eNB or UMTS NodeB. 12 The main
reselection concepts have, in most of the cases, remained the same in LTE as in UMTS, more
about reselection procedures is given in [12] and [13]. Let us cover the new concepts uniquely
introduced in LTE.
The 3GPP release 8 has introduced a priority layer concept. This means that any IRAT
(inter-radio access technology) or inter-frequency cell reselection between cells or frequencies
(or even bands) is controlled by the assigned priority. The layer priority is not applied to
cells from the same frequency as that of the serving cell.
As the complexity of the deployed system topologies increases, such priority-based reselection
becomes important. With the diversity of cells deployed in the network (femto, micro, or
macro) within the same or different RATs, the priority reselection can assist the operator in
enforcing the targeted camping strategy. In this situation, the cell reselection can be layered
up by assigning the cells into high, low, or equal priorities. Priorities are typically provided to
the UE via system information or RRC release messages.
Table 3.22 summarizes the concept of layer priority and the measurement requirements by
the UE, for inter-frequency, and inter-RAT. In LTE deployment, it is expected that the priority
of LTE would be higher than that of other RATs, especially as LTE provides a higher data
rate than other RATs (e.g., UMTS). In other scenarios, the LTE priority might be lower than
non-LTE femto cells (i.e., home NodeB) in the deployed areas. Hence, the priority setting
is an optimization choice that depends on the designed camping strategy, LTE deployment
coverage, targeted performance, and end-user perceived experience.
Multi-mode capability is one of the key elements in the devices supporting multiple RATs.
The modem capability is essential to provide seamless mobility across various RATs. The
fact that the different deployed RATs may overlap or set as hotspots makes it even more
important to provide uninterrupted services. As the user moves across inter-RAT 2G/3G
(UMTS/GERAN/HRPD) and 4G (LTE) coverage areas, the optimization process thus needs
to ensure service continuity while maintaining a good trade-off with the device’s battery
consumption. In thehe multi-mode device, though appealing to users, the battery consumption
can be a major concern, depending on the scale of measurements with the configured
network parameters.
3.4.2 LTE to WCDMA Inter-RAT Cell Reselection
In the LTE idle state, SIBs are broadcast using the PBCH (physical broadcast channel) and
the PDSCH to all UEs. SIBs 2 and 3 contain parameters related to access and cell reselection.
Additional cell reselection information for intra-and inter-frequency cells is defined in SIBs
4 and 5, respectively. And the IRAT reselection information is contained in SIBs 6, 7, and 8