You are on page 1of 29

EE403 Wireless & Mobile

Communications
z Instructor: Dr. S.M.Sajid,
sm.sajid@nu.edu.pk

Reference Texts:
Theodore S. Rappaport “Wireless Communications: Principles and Practice”
William Stallings “Wireless Communications and Networks”
P. Nicopolitidis, et al. “Wireless Networks”
William C. Y. Lee “Wireless and Cellular Telecommunications”

Courtesy: MIT

Is there a future for wireless?
Some history
z Ancient Systems: Smoke Signals, Carrier Pigeons, …
z Radio invented in the 1880s by Marconi
z Many sophisticated military radio systems were
developed during and after WW2
z Cellular has enjoyed exponential growth since
1988, with almost 1 billion users worldwide today
z Ignited the recent wireless revolution
RIP
z Growth rate tapering off
z 3G (voice+data) roll-out disappointing Wireless
Revolution
z Many spectacular failures recently
z 1G Wireless LANs/Iridium/Metricom 1980-2003

Glimmers of Hope z Internet and laptop use exploding z 2G/3G wireless LANs growing rapidly z Low rate data demand is high z Military and security needs require wireless z Emerging interdisciplinary applications .

Future Wireless Networks Ubiquitous Communication Among People and Devices Wireless Internet access Nth generation Cellular Wireless Ad Hoc Networks Sensor Networks Wireless Entertainment Smart Homes/Spaces Automated Highways All this and more… •Hard Delay Constraints •Hard Energy Constraints .

Design Challenges z Wireless channels are a difficult and capacity- limited broadcast communications medium z Traffic patterns. user locations. and network conditions are constantly changing z Applications are heterogeneous with hard constraints that must be met by the network z Energy and delay constraints change design principles across all layers of the protocol stack .

Multimedia Requirements Voice Data Video Delay <100ms . with poor results . <100ms Packet Loss <1% 0 <1% BER 10-3 10-6 10-6 Data Rate 8-32 Kbps 1-100 Mbps 1-20 Mbps Traffic Continuous Bursty Continuous One-size-fits-all protocols and design do not work well Wired networks use this approach.

000 wired.4 9.wireless Ethernet bit-rate "gap" 1000 User 1000 User wired.4 cellular 1 1 Radio .000 FDDI 10.000 ATM Ethernet 10.6 cellular digital 2.1 .1 .000 100 M ATM 100.4 modem cellular Packet 2.wireless Bit-Rate Bit-Rate ISDN bit-rate "gap" (kbps) 2nd gen (kbps) 100 WLAN 100 28.8 modem 1st gen 32 kbps Polling WLAN 9.01 1970 1980 1990 2000 1970 1980 1990 2000 YEAR YEAR .01 . Wireless Performance Gap LOCAL AREA PACKET SWITCHING WIDE AREA CIRCUIT SWITCHING 100.6 modem PCS 10 10 14.

z WLANs: ~10 Mbps. z Technology Enhancements z Hardware: Better batteries. coding. adaptivity. z Network: Dynamic resource allocation. z Application: Soft and adaptive QoS. DSP. Evolution of Current Systems z Wireless systems today z 2G Cellular: ~30-70 Kbps. Mobility support. Better circuits/processors. “Current Systems on Steroids” . BW. modulation. z Link: Antennas. z WLANs: ~70 Mbps. z Next Generation z 3G Cellular: ~300 Kbps.

Delay 802. Energy 2G 2G Cellular Mobility Fundamental Design Breakthroughs Needed . Cost 3G Rate vs. Future Generations Other Tradeoffs: Rate Rate vs. Coverage 4G Rate vs.11b WLAN Rate vs.

Crosslayer Design z Hardware z Link Delay Constraints z Access Rate Constraints Energy Constraints z Network z Application Adapt across design layers Reduce uncertainty through scheduling Provide robustness via diversity .

Current Wireless Systems z Cellular Systems z Wireless LANs z Satellite Systems z Paging Systems z Bluetooth .

z Co-channel interference between same color cells. as well as networking burden BASE STATION MTSO . Cellular Systems: Reuse channels to maximize capacity z Geographic region divided into cells z Frequencies/timeslots/codes reused at spatially-separated locations. z Base stations/MTSOs coordinate handoff and control functions z Shrinking cell size increases capacity.

Cellular Phone Networks San Francisco BS BS Internet New York MTSO MTSO PSTN BS .

z Standard based on wideband CDMA z Packet-based switching for both voice and data z 3G cellular struggling in Europe and Asia z Evolution of existing systems (2. 3G Cellular Design: Voice and Data z Data is bursty. whereas voice is continuous z Typically require different access and routing strategies z 3G “widens the data pipe”: z 384 Kbps.6798G): z GSM+EDGE z IS-95(CDMA)+HDR z 100 Kbps may be enough z What is beyond 3G? The trillion dollar question .5G.2.

g. Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs) 01011011 0101 1011 Internet Access Point z WLANs connect “local” computers (100m range) z Breaks data into packets z Channel access is shared (random access) z Backbone Internet provides best-effort service z Poor performance in some apps (e. video) .

z 802. Wireless LAN Standards z 802.11g (New Standard) z Standard in 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands z OFDM z Speeds up to 54 Mbps .11b (Current Generation) z Standard for 2.4GHz ISM band (80 MHz) z Frequency hopped spread spectrum z 1.11a (Emerging Generation) all WLAN z Standard for 5GHz NII band (300 MHz) cards will z OFDM with time division have all 3 z 20-70 Mbps. 500 ft range In 200?. variable range z Similar to HiperLAN in Europe standards z 802.6-10 Mbps.

Satellite Systems z Cover very large areas z Different orbit heights z GEOs (39000 Km) versus LEOs (2000 Km) z Optimized for one-way transmission z Radio (XM. DAB) and movie (SatTV) broadcasting z Most two-way systems struggling or bankrupt z Expensive alternative to terrestrial system z A few ambitious systems on the horizon .

Paging Systems z Broad coverage for short messaging z Message broadcast from all base stations z Simple terminals z Optimized for 1-way transmission z Answer-back hard z Overtaken by cellular .

61-Cimini-7/98 . and consumer electronics companies z Few applications beyond cable replacement 8C32810. PC. extendable to 100m) z 2. Bluetooth z Cable replacement RF technology (low cost) z Short range (10m.4 GHz band (crowded) z 1 Data (700 Kbps) and 3 voice channels z Widely supported by telecommunications.

Emerging Systems z Ad hoc wireless networks z Sensor networks z Distributed control networks .

Ad-Hoc Networks z Peer-to-peer communications. z No backbone infrastructure. z Topology is dynamic. z Fully connected with different link SINRs . z Routing can be multihop.

z Crosslayer design critical and very challenging. access. z Energy constraints impose interesting design tradeoffs for communication and networking. z The capacity of such networks is generally unknown. Design Issues z Ad-hoc networks provide a flexible network infrastructure for many emerging applications. . and routing strategies for ad-hoc networks are generally ad-hoc. z Transmission.

Sensor Networks Energy is the driving constraint z Nodes powered by nonrechargeable batteries z Data flows to centralized location. . compression. and signal processing. reception. z Low per-node rates but up to 100. z Nodes can cooperate in transmission. z Data highly correlated in time and space.000 nodes.

z Optimization of node cooperation. z Changes everything about the network design: z Bit allocation must be optimized across all protocols. Energy-Constrained Nodes z Each node can only send a finite number of bits. and processing energy. z Sophisticated techniques not necessarily energy-efficient. . z Transmit energy minimized by maximizing bit time z Circuit energy consumption increases with bit time z Introduces a delay versus energy tradeoff for each bit z Short-range networks must consider transmit. node/network lifetime tradeoffs. throughput vs. z Sleep modes save energy but complicate networking. z Delay vs. circuit.

UAVs .Cars . z Controller design should be robust to network faults. z Joint application and communication network design. . Distributed Control over Wireless Links Automated Vehicles .Insect flyers z Packet loss and/or delays impacts controller performance.

z The best rate/delay tradeoff for a communication system in distributed control cannot be determined. Joint Design Challenges z There is no methodology to incorporate random delays or packet losses into control system designs. z Current autonomous vehicle platoon controllers are not string stable with any communication delay Can we make distributed control robust to the network? Yes. by a radical redesign of the controller and the network. .

Spectrum Regulation z Spectral Allocation in US controlled by FCC (commercial) or OSM (defense) z FCC auctions spectral blocks for set applications. z Some spectrum set aside for universal use z Worldwide spectrum controlled by ITU-R Regulation can stunt innovation. and delay system rollout . cause economic disasters.

Standards z Interacting systems require standardization z Companies want their systems adopted as standard z Alternatively try for de-facto standards z Standards determined by TIA/CTIA in US z IEEE standards often adopted z Worldwide standards determined by ITU-T z In Europe. ETSI is equivalent of IEEE Standards process fraught with inefficiencies and conflicts of interest .

Main Points z The wireless vision encompasses many exciting systems and applications z Technical challenges transcend across all layers of the system design z Wireless systems today have limited performance and interoperability z Standards and spectral allocation heavily impact the evolution of wireless technology .