See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/317845033

Standard Propagation Model Tuning for Path Loss Predictions in Built-Up

Environments

Conference Paper  in  Lecture Notes in Computer Science · July 2017

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-62407-5_26

CITATIONS READS

12 3,257

6 authors, including:

Segun I. Popoola Prof. AAA. Atayero

Manchester Metropolitan University Covenant University Ota Ogun State, Nigeria
93 PUBLICATIONS   341 CITATIONS    216 PUBLICATIONS   674 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Nasir Faruk Carlos Tavares Calafate

University of Ilorin Universitat Politècnica de València
94 PUBLICATIONS   452 CITATIONS    354 PUBLICATIONS   3,827 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Efficient Traffic Management in Urban Environments View project

Wireless BANK SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM WITH MONEY TRACKER (WIBANK) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Olawoyin Abiodun on 11 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Standard Propagation Model Tuning for Path
Loss Predictions in Built-Up Environments

Segun I. Popoola1(&), Aderemi A. Atayero1, Nasir Faruk2,

Carlos T. Calafate3, Lukman A. Olawoyin2, and Victor O. Matthews1
1
Electrical and Information Engineering, Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria
segun.popoola@stu.cu.edu.ng, {atayero,
victor.matthews}@covenantuniversity.edu.ng
2
Department of Telecommunication Science,
University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria
{faruk.n,olawoyin.la}@unilorin.edu.ng
3
Department of Computer Engineering,
Technical University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
calafate@disca.upv.es

Abstract. This paper provides a simple optimization procedure using ATOLL

planning tool for Standard Propagation Model (SPM). Measurement campaigns
were conducted to collect Received Signal Strength (RSS) data over commercial
base stations operating at 1800 MHz. The prediction accuracy of widely used
models were assessed. The models provided high prediction errors. The opti-
mization procedure involves the use of Digital Terrain Model (DTM), clutter
classes, clutter heights, vector maps, scanned images, and Web Map Service
(WMS). A Logarithmic weighting function was used to calculate the weight of
the clutter loss on each pixel from the pixel with the receiver in the direction of
the transmitter, up to the defined maximum distance. The approach has proven
promising by achieving high accuracy and minimizing the prediction errors by
47.4%.

Keywords: Model tuning
Path loss
RF network planning
Radio

propagation

1 Introduction

For an efficient and effective radio access network planning, a knowledge of the
characteristics of radio wave propagation in a built-up environment is required [1, 2].
Due to the medium of propagating Electromagnetic (EM) waves and the antecedent
effect such as Reflections, diffractions, and scatterings which are dominant during
propagation in urban areas as a results of physical obstructions (clutter) in the propa-
gation environment. The interaction of transmitted EM waves with building walls,
surfaces of bill boards and other artificial structures, and the bodies of moving objects
usually results in reception of multiple copies of the transmitted signals at the receivers
which can be termed as multipath [3]. The multiple copies reach the mobile station
from different directions with different time delays, leading to signal fading.

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

O. Gervasi et al. (Eds.): ICCSA 2017, Part VI, LNCS 10409, pp. 363–375, 2017.
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-62407-5_26
364 S.I. Popoola et al.

Consequently, the complex nature of urban environments is responsible for the random
and linear time-varying characteristics of the radio channel [4].
Signal fading in wireless communication may be at small scale or large scale [3].
Small-scale signal fading occurs as a result of multipath with an effect of rapid variation
in the received signal strength with time [5]. On the other hand, large-scale signal
fading is the attenuation of the mean signal power by virtue of the position of the
receiver relative to the transmitter. This is also known as path loss [6]. Since radio
engineers do not have control over the man-made environment, it is important to
properly quantify the resulting power loss for an efficient radio network.
Path loss prediction models are mathematical formulation of the propagation
channel as a function of the separation distance between the transmitter and the
receiver, the frequency of transmission, the antenna heights of both transmitter and
receiver, and other environmental factors. Radio network planners rely on path loss
prediction models to ensure an acceptable Quality of Service (QoS) and satisfactory
customer experience. In order to avoid incessant call drops and other network con-
nectivity issues, the received signal level at the receiver must be greater than the
minimum sensitivity of the receiver. The reception sensitivity varies with different
types of receiver. Estimation of signal path loss is one of the main components of the
link budget of a wireless communication system [3].
Radio propagation models have been broadly categorized into two: deterministic
and empirical models. Deterministic models [7–10] have proven to be more accurate
but they require a detailed information about the propagation environment while
empirical models [11–13] are simple and requires less computation effort. They are
formulated based on extensive measurement campaigns which makes them to be highly
environment-dependent. Although several empirical path loss models have been pro-
posed in the literature [13–22], it is still very difficult to synthesize a global model
which is suitable for every built-up area. The use of an empirical path loss model for
wireless network design in an environment other than the one it was intended for will
produce significant prediction errors. Large prediction errors will consequently lead to
poor network coverage as RF engineers are much likely to situate the base stations at
inappropriate locations.
In this paper, we seek to investigate the prediction accuracy of widely available
empirical path loss prediction models in built-up environment of Lagos, Nigeria.
Measurement campaigns were conducted to collect received signal strength data over
commercial base stations operating at 1800 MHz. In addition, we proposed an
adaptable empirical model for path loss predictions by tuning the parameters of SPM to
give a better representation of the local environment.
The remaining part of the paper is organized as follows: Sect. 2 reviews the
available empirical path loss models suitable for 1800 MHz frequency band; Sect. 3
describes the materials and the methodology used in this study; Sect. 4 gives the results
and discusses the findings while the paper is concluded in Sect. 5.
 SPM Tuning for Path Loss Predictions in Built-Up Environments 365

2 Empirical Path Loss Models

2.1 Okumura-Hata Model
Okumura-Hata model is an empirical formulation of the graphical path loss data for
150–1500 MHz band [11]. The separation distance between the transmitter and the
receiver ranges from 1 to 20 km. The standard formula for median path loss in urban
areas is given by Eq. (1):

PLurban ðdBÞ ¼ 69:55 þ 26:16  logðfc Þ  13:82  logðht Þ

 aðhr Þ þ ½44:9  6:55 logðht Þ  logðdÞ ð1Þ

The correction factors for mobile antenna height in a built-up environment is given by
Eqs. (2) and (3)

aðhr Þ ¼ 8:29½logð1:54hr Þ2  1:1 for f c  300 MHz ð2Þ

aðhr Þ ¼ 3:2½logð11:75hr Þ2  4:97 for f c  300 MHz ð3Þ

where
fc = Frequency (in MHz) from 150 MHz to 1500 MHz
ht = Effective transmitter antenna height in meters
hr = Effective receiver antenna height in meters
d ¼ Tx  Rx separation distance in km
The path loss for a suburban area is given by Eq. (4)

fc 2
PLsuburban ¼ PLurban ðdBÞ  2½logð Þ  5:4 ð4Þ
28
For an open rural area, Eq. (5) is used

PLrural ¼ PLurban ðdBÞ  4:78½logðfc Þ2  18:33  logðfc Þ  40:98 ð5Þ

2.2 COST 231-Hata Model

COST 231 extends Hata model to cover the frequency range of 1500 to 2000 MHz
[12]. The transmitter height varies from 30 to 200 m. The height of the receiver can be
between 1 and 10 m. The path loss model is given by Eqs. (6) and (7):

PLðdBÞ ¼ 46:3 þ 33:9  logðfc Þ  13:82  logðht Þ  aðhr Þ þ ½44:9  6:55 logðht Þ
 logðdÞ þ Cm
ð6Þ
366 S.I. Popoola et al.

aðhr Þ ¼ 8:29½logð1:54hr Þ2  1:1 for f c  300 MHz ð7Þ

aðhr Þ ¼ 3:2½logð11:75hr Þ2  4:97 for f c  300 MHz ð8Þ

0 dB for medium-sized city and suburban areas
Cm ¼ ð9Þ
3 dB for metropolitan areas

Range of parameters are as follows:

f: 1500–2000 MHz
ht: 30–200 m
hr: 1–10 m
d: 1–20 km

2.3 ECC-33 Model

This model is suited for the Ultra-High Frequency (UHF) band. Here, path loss is given
by Eq. (10) [23]:

PLðdBÞ ¼ Afs þ Abm  Gt  Gr ð10Þ

where
Afs = free space attenuation
Abm = basic median path loss
Gt = transmitter antenna height gain factor
Gr = receiver antenna height gain factor

Afs ¼ 92:4 þ 20 logðd Þ þ 20 logðdÞ ð11Þ

Abm ¼ 20:41 þ 9:83  logðd Þ þ 7:894  logð f Þ þ 9:56½logð f Þ2 ð12Þ

  n o
ht
Gt ¼ flog g 13:958 þ 5:8  ðlog dÞ2 ð13Þ
200

For medium-sized cities,

Gr ¼ f42:57 þ 13:7  logð f Þgflogðhr Þ  0:585g ð14Þ

For large cities,

Gr ¼ 0:759hr  1:862 ð15Þ

 SPM Tuning for Path Loss Predictions in Built-Up Environments 367

2.4 Egli Path Loss Model

This model is applicable to frequency range of 40 to 900 MHz at a maximum sepa-
ration distance of 60 km [4]. It was derived from measurement data on UHF and VHF
television transmissions in several large cities. The formula of Egli path loss model is
given in Eq. (16):

PLðdBÞ ¼ 20  logð f Þ þ 40  logðd Þ  20  logðht Þ þ 73:6  10  logðhr Þ ð16Þ

2.5 Standard Propagation Model

SPM was developed based on the Hata path loss formulas [11, 12]. This empirical
model is suitable for path loss predictions in the 150–1500 MHz frequency band. It
determines the large-scale fading of received signal strength over a distance range of 1–
20 km. Therefore, it is appropriate for mobile channel characterization of popular
cellular technologies such as GSM [13].
The received signal strength is given by Eq. (17):

Pr ¼ Pt  fK1 þ K2 logðd Þ þ K3 logðht Þ þ K4 :DiffractionLoss

ð17Þ
þ K5 logðd Þ:logðht Þ þ K6 :hr þ K7 logðhr Þ þ Kclutter :fclutter þ Khill g

The model parameters are defined as follows:

Pr = Received power in dBm
Pt = Transmitted power (EIRP) in dBm
K1 = Constant offset in dB
K2 = Multiplying factor for log (d)
d = Separation distance (in meters)
K3 = Multiplying factor for log (ht)
ht = Effective transmitter antenna height (in meters)
K4 = Multiplying factor for diffraction calculation
K5 = Multiplying factor for log(d).log(ht)
K6 = Multiplying factor for hr
K7 = Multiplying factor for log (hr)
hr = Effective mobile receiver antenna height (in meters)
Kclutter = Multiplying factor for fclutter
fclutter = Average of the weighted losses due to clutter
Khill = Corrective factor for hilly regions
The Hata path loss model is represented by Eq. (18) [8]:

PLðdBÞ ¼ A1 þ A2 logð f Þ þ A3 logðht Þ þ ½B1 þ B2 logðht Þ þ B3 :ht ½logðd Þ  aðhr Þ

 Cclutter
ð18Þ
368 S.I. Popoola et al.

The definition of parameters is as follows:

A1…B3: Hata parameters
f: Frequency in MHz
ht: Effective transmitter antenna height in metres
d: Separation distance in km
hr: Mobile receiver height in meters
a(hr): Mobile receiver antenna height correction factor in dB
Cclutter: Clutter correction function
Although distance is usually expressed in km in Hata formulas, SPM accepts
distance values in meters. The generic values of the Hata model parameters are the ones
stated below:


69:55 for 900 MHz
A1 ¼
46:30 for 1800 MHz


26:16 for 900 MHz
A2 ¼
33:90 for 1800 MHz

A3 = −13.82
B1 = 44.90
B2 = −6.55
B3 = 0
Therefore, the path loss model for GSM technologies that operate in the 900 MHz
band becomes Eq. (19)

PLðdBÞ ¼ 69:55 þ 26:16 logð f Þ  13:82 logðht Þ þ ½44:9  6:55 logðht Þ½logðd Þ
 aðhr Þ  Cclutter ð19Þ

On the other hand, the path loss predictions for the DCS 1800 counterpart is given
by Eq. (20) [9]:

PLðdBÞ ¼ 46:3 þ 33:9 logð f Þ  13:82 logðht Þ þ ½44:9  6:55 logðht Þ½logðd Þ  aðhr Þ
 Cclutter
ð20Þ

SPM ignored the effects of diffraction, clutter, and terrain to produce Eq. (21). It
assumed that appropriate settings of A1 and K1, which account for only one clutter
class, will cater for the influence of these external factors on signal propagation. The
correction function for the mobile receiver antenna height was also ignored for
hr  1:5 m since it has negligible values for an average mobile antenna height. The
resulting path loss model is given in Eq. (5):
 SPM Tuning for Path Loss Predictions in Built-Up Environments 369

PLðdBÞ ¼ A1 þ A2 logð f Þ þ A3 logðht Þ þ ½B1 þ B2 logðht Þ½logðd Þ ð21Þ

The SPM formula can be further reduced to Eq. (22):

PLðdBÞ ¼ K1 þ K2 logðd Þ þ K3 logðht Þ þ K5 logðd Þ:logðht Þ þ K6 :hr þ K7 logðhr Þ ð22Þ

Presenting the reduced Hata equation as a model which accepts distance input in m as
in SPM, we have Eq. (7):

PLðdBÞ ¼ A1 þ A2 logð f Þ  3B1 þ ½A3  3B2 ½logðht Þ þ B1 logðd Þ þ B2 logðht Þ:logðd Þ

ð23Þ

Equating the coefficients of Eqs. (22) and (23):

K1 = A1 + A2log(f) − 3B1
K2 = B1
K1 = A3 − 3B2
K5 = B2
K6 = K7 = 0
Hence, the SPM mathematical repr esentation of the DCS 1800 MHz mobile channel is
given by Eq. (24):

PLðdBÞ ¼ 22 þ 44:9 logðd Þ þ 5:83 logðht Þ  ½6:55 logðd Þ:logðht Þ ð24Þ

3 Materials and Methods

3.1 Field Measurements and Data Collection

Measurement campaigns were conducted in the built-up areas of Lagos, Nigeria at
1800 MHz. Lagos is a popular urban center in Nigeria, located on coordinates 6°31′
28.22″ N, 3°22′45.17″ E. The metropolis has a land area of 385.9 square miles,
90.75% of which is categorized as urban. It is composed of high-rise residential
apartments built close to each other with building heights of between 2–4 floors.
A drive test was performed along pre-planned survey routes to collect received
signal strength data in the built-up environment. A TEMS W995 phone was interfaced
with TEMS investigation software [24], Garmin Global Positioning System (GPS) and
MapInfo Pro [25] on a laptop. The laptop has the following specifications: Intel Core
i5-3210MCPU@2.50 GHz speed with 4 GB RAM and 64-bit Windows 7 operating
system.
The mobile station was locked on a single Broadcast Control Channel (BCCH) to
avoid the measurement of interfering signals. Since the commercial base stations use
directional antennas, measurements were carefully planned to cover only areas in the
direction of the main beam. In order to overcome the effects of fast fading, a minimum
of 36 samples were collected over distance of 40k satisfy the Lee criterion.
370 S.I. Popoola et al.

A maximum vehicle speed of 40 km/h was ensured during the survey to eliminate
Doppler effects. The measurements were taken under normal climatic conditions to
ensure high-quality data collection. Also, a good radio frequency clearance was
maintained.

3.2 Standard Propagation Model Tuning

This section describes the SPM tuning process using field measurements obtained from
the built-up environment. This process involves the use of geographic data which
include DTM, clutter classes, clutter heights, vector maps, scanned images, and WMS
raster-format geo data files. The DTM provides information about the elevation of the
ground over sea level. The information about the land cover or land use is obtained
from the clutter classes. Clutter height maps offers more precise information about the
altitude of clutter over DTM with one altitude defined per pixel. Vector maps are maps
with possible routes which are defined as vectors. Scanned images such as road maps
and satellite images provides a precise background representing the actual physical
environment. WMS raster-format geo data files are raster images from a WMS server.
These geographic data helps in verifying the correspondence between the area under
investigation and the field measurements. The whole procedure was carried out in
ATOLL [26].
The measurement data were filtered to eliminate the points that are the least rep-
resentative of the survey area while retaining a number of points that is both repre-
sentative and large enough to provide statistically valid results. Such outliers include
the measurement points in clutter classes that are of no significance in terms of the
propagation model to be tuned. Also, we disregarded extreme signal levels, those that
were too close to the transmitter, and those that suffered from too much diffraction.
Furthermore, data points that came from behind directional antennas were not included.
The tuning process considered both the ‘near transmitter’ and ‘far from transmitter’
conditions. The effective transmitter antenna height was calculated using the ground
slope at the receiver as represented by Eq. (25)

HTxeff ¼ ðHTx þ HOTx Þ  HORx þ ðKxdÞ ð25Þ

where
HORx = the ground elevation above sea level at the receiver (m)
K = the ground slope calculated over a minimum distance from the receiver
The diffraction loss over the transmitter-receiver profile was calculated using the
Millington method. The average clutter height specified for each clutter class was used
for the transmitter-receiver profile in the calculation of the diffraction edge. The losses
due to clutter was estimated over a maximum distance from the receiver using Eq. (26):
Xn
f ðclutterÞ ¼ i¼1
Li wi ð26Þ
 SPM Tuning for Path Loss Predictions in Built-Up Environments 371

where,
L = loss due to clutter (in dB).
w = weight determined through the weighting function.
n = number of points taken into account over the profile.
Weighting function is the mathematical formula used to calculate the weight of the
clutter loss on each pixel from the pixel with the receiver in the direction of the
transmitter, up to the defined maximum distance. Logarithmic weighting function
employed is given by Eq. (27):

logðdi þ 1Þ
wi ¼ Pn D dj ð27Þ
j¼1 logðD þ 1Þ

where, di is the distance between the receiver and the ith point and D is the maximum
distance defined. The maximum distance indicates the distance from the receiver for
which clutter losses will be considered via a weighting function, with an effect on the
influence of clutter on total losses which diminishes with distance from the receiver.
This value was set to 150 m for the urban environment.
The model tuning was carried out using ATOLL planning tool with the aim of
minimizing the mean error and standard deviation of measured values versus calculated
values. A mathematical solution was obtained for both Line of Sight (LOS) and
Non-Line of Sight (NLOS) conditions.

3.3 Statistical Analysis of Prediction Accuracy of Models

Two different approaches were employed to evaluate the performance of the model
tuning. First, the prediction results were appraised based on the path loss data used for
tuning. Second, the prediction accuracy of the tuned SPM was adjudged relative to
other models and the measurement data. The following statistical performance metrics
were used: Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), and
Standard Deviation (SDE). The mathematical expressions of these metrics are given by
Eq. (28)–(30).

1 Xn p
MAE ¼ ðPLm i  PLi Þ ð28Þ
n i¼1

rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 Xn p 2
RMSE ¼ ðPLm i  PLi Þ ð29Þ
n i¼1

rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 Xn p 2
SD ¼ ðjPLm i  PLi j  lÞ ð30Þ
n i¼1

where, µ = the mean prediction error in decibel.

372 S.I. Popoola et al.

4 Results and Discussions

Figures 1 and 2 provide the comparison of path loss prediction at Locations A and B
respectively. In both Figures, Egli model under-estimates the path loss and ECC-33
over-estimates the path loss. The Okumura-Hata and COST 231 models are the base
line SPM, these models provides good fitness at distances above 400 m, below which
they underestimate the path loss. However, the tuned SPM provides better predictions
along all the routes, across all distances. Table 1 provides the tuned parameters for the
tuned model. The SPM ignored the effects of diffraction, clutter, and terrain. This

Fig. 1. Path loss prediction results at Location A.

Fig. 2. Path loss prediction results at Location B

 SPM Tuning for Path Loss Predictions in Built-Up Environments 373

Table 1. SPM tuning result for built-up environments

Parameter Description Before tuning After tuning
Ht method - Abs spot Ht Slope at receiver
Diffraction method - Deygout Millington
K1 (LOS) - 22 63
K1 (NLOS) - 22 76
K2 (LOS) log (d) 44.9 18
K2 (NLOS) log (d) 44.9 20
K3 log (ht) 5.83 18.2
K4 Diffraction 1 0
K5 log (d).log (ht) −6.55 −10
Additional losses Clutter losses 0 50

assumes single clutter class, while, the turned model, considers the diffraction losses.
This increases the clutter losses from 0 dB in the case of conventional SPM to 50 dB as
in the turned model. The tuned SPM is expressed mathematically in Eq. (31) and (32).
Equation (31) is applicable to LOS scenarios while Eq. (32) can be used for NLOS
propagation scenarios in built-up areas.

PLðdBÞ ¼ 113 þ 18  logðd Þ þ 18:2  logðht Þ  ½10 logðd Þ:logðht Þ ð31Þ

PLðdBÞ ¼ 126 þ 20  logðd Þ þ 18:2  logðht Þ  ½10 logðd Þ:logðht Þ ð32Þ

Tables 2 and 3 provide the statistical evaluation of path loss at Locations A and B. For
Location A, RMSE values of 13.75 dB, 12.48 dB, 14.12 dB and 38.21 dB respectively
for Hata, COST 231, ECC-33 and Egli models. These are higher than the acceptable
6 dB threshold values defined in [7]. While, for Location B, Hata, COST 231, ECC-33

Table 2. Statistical evaluation of path loss predictions at Ikeja, Lagos (Location A)

ME (dB) RMSE (dB) SD (dB)
Hata 10.71 13.75 8.63
COST 231 9.33 12.48 8.28
ECC-33 12.75 14.12 6.06
Egli 36.69 38.21 10.67
Tuned SPM 4.10 5.72 3.99

Table 3. Statistical evaluation of path loss predictions at Ikoyi, Lagos (Location B)

ME (dB) RMSE (dB) SD (dB)
Hata 11.87 15.60 10.13
COST 231 10.78 14.42 9.58
ECC-33 12.57 14.45 7.12
Egli 37.18 39.32 12.79
Tuned SPM 4.52 5.92 3.83
374 S.I. Popoola et al.

and Egli modes obtained RMSE values of 15.60 dB, 14.42 dB, 14.45 dB and
37.18 dB respectively, wit COST 231 model providing the last error amongst the four
contending models, across the locations. It worth noting that despite the high prediction
error of the ECC-3 model across the locations, the model has the least standard
deviation error. However, the tuned SPM achieves RMSE of 5.92 dB and 5.72 dB for
the two locations. These values are 47.4% and 39.6% decrease in prediction error when
compared with COST 231 model along the locations.

5 Conclusion

This paper presents measurement campaigns of EM waves in the GSM 1800 MHz
band within built-up areas. A simple optimization procedure using ATOLL planning
tool for standard propagation model is provided. The optimization process involves the
use of DTM, clutter classes, clutter heights, vector maps, scanned images, and WMS.
A Logarithmic weighting function was used to calculate the weight of the clutter loss
on each pixel from the pixel with the receiver in the direction of the transmitter, up to
the defined maximum distance. The approach has proven promising by achieving high
accuracy and minimizing the prediction errors by 47.4%.

Acknowledgment. The authors wish to appreciate the Center for Research, Innovation, and
Discovery (CU-CRID) of Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria for partly funding of this research.

References
1. Lempiäinen, J., Manninen, M.: Radio Interface System Planning for GSM/GPRS/UMTS.
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2001)
2. Laiho, J., Wacker, A., Novosad, T.: Radio Network Planning and Optimisation for UMTS.
Wiley, New York (2002)
3. Rappaport, T.S.: Wireless Communications: Principles and Practice. Prentice Hall PTR,
Upper Saddle River (2002)
4. Parsons, J.D.: The Mobile Radio Propagation Channel, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York (2000)
5. Clark, R.H.: A Statistical Description of Mobile Radio Reception. BSTJ 47, 957–1000
(1968)
6. Mishra, A.J.: Advanced Cellular Networks Planning and Optimization 2G/2.5G/3G…
Evolution to 4G, pp. 1–12. Wiley, New York (2007). ISBN 13 978-0-470-01471-4
7. Luebbers, R.J.: Propagation prediction for hilly terrain using GTD wedge diffraction. IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag. 32(9), 951–955 (1984)
8. Mohtashami, V., Shishegar, A.A.: Modified wavefront decomposition method for fast and
accurate ray-tracing simulation. Microw. Antennas Propag. IET 6(3), 295–304 (2012)
9. Hufford, G.A.: An integral equation approach to the problem of wave propagation over an
irregular surface. Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 9(4), 391–404 (1952)
10. Zelley, C.A., Constantinou, C.C.: A three-dimensional parabolic equation applied to
VHF/UHF propagation over irregular terrain. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 47(10), 1586–
1596 (1999)
 SPM Tuning for Path Loss Predictions in Built-Up Environments 375

11. Masahara, H.: Empirical formula for propagation loss in land-mobile radio services. IEEE
Trans. Veh. Technol. 29(3), 317–325 (1980)
12. COST 231 Project: Urban Transmission Loss Models for Mobile Radio in the 900 and
1800 MHz band, COST 231 TD (90) 119 Rev. 2, The Hague, Netherlands (1991)
13. Popoola, S.I., Oseni, O.F.: Performance evaluation of radio propagation models on GSM
network in urban area of Lagos, Nigeria. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 5(6), 1212–1217 (2014)
14. Popoola, S.I., Oseni, O.F.: Empirical path loss models for GSM network deployment in
Makurdi, Nigeria. Int. Refereed J. Eng. Sci. 3(6), 85–94 (2014)
15. Oseni, O.F., Popoola, S.I., Abolade, R.O., Adegbola, O.A.: Comparative analysis of
received signal strength prediction models for radio network planning of GSM 900 MHz in
Ilorin, Nigeria. Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng. (IJITEE) 4(3), 45–50 (2014)
16. Faruk, N., Ayeni, A.A., Adediran, Y.A.: Error bounds of empirical path loss models at
VHF/UHF bands in Kwara State, Nigeria. In: Proceedings of IEEE EUROCON Conference,
Croatia, pp. 602–607 (2013)
17. Faruk, N., Adediran, Y.A., Ayeni, A.A.: On the study of empirical path loss models for
accurate prediction of TV signal for secondary users. Prog. Electromagn. Res. (PIER) B
USA 49, 155–176 (2013)
18. Rath, H.K., Verma, S., Simha, A., Karandikar, A.: Path loss model for Indian terrain -
empirical approach. In: 2016 Twenty Second National Conference on Communication
(NCC), Guwahati, pp. 1–6 (2016)
19. Al Salameh, M.S.H., Al-Zu’bi, M.M.: Prediction of radio wave propagation for wireless
cellular networks in Jordan. In: 2015 7th International Conference on Knowledge and Smart
Technology (KST), Chonburi, pp. 149–154 (2015)
20. Nimavat, V.D., Kulkarni, G.R.: Simulation and performance evaluation of GSM propagation
channel under the urban, suburban and rural environments. In: 2012 International
Conference on Communication, Information and Computing Technology (ICCICT),
Mumbai, pp. 1–5 (2012)
21. Ibhaze, A.E., Ajose, S.O., Atayero, A.A.A., Idachaba, F.E.: Developing smart cities through
optimal wireless mobile network. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Emerging
Technologies and Innovative Business Practices for the Transformation of Societies
(EmergiTech), Balaclava, pp. 118–123 (2016)
22. Ibhaze, A.E., Imoize, A.L., Ajose, S.O., John, S.N., Ndujiuba, C.U., Idachaba, F.E.: An
empirical propagation model for path loss prediction at 2100 MHz in a dense urban
environment. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 8(1) (2017)
23. Abhayawardhana, V.S., Wassell, I.J., Crosbsy, D., Sellars, M.P., Brown, M.G.: Comparison
of empirical propagation path loss models for fixed wireless access systems. In: IEEE
Vehicular Technology Conference, Spring, vol. 1, pp. 73–77 (2005)
24. TEMS: Testing, Monitoring, and Analytics Software, Ashburn, VA, USA. www.tems.com
25. Pitney Bowes: MapInfo Pro. http://www.pitneybowes.com/us/location-intelligence/
geographic-information-systems/mapinfo-pro.html
26. Forsk: ATOLL 3.2.0 Radio Planning and Optimization Software, France. www.forsk.com

View publication stats