L2600 Performance Report Tehran

2015-04-25
Performance Summary I (L2600)

Below is performance summary of collocated L2600 sites. Final tuning was performed at 5 PM (03-07-2016) and
promising results are visible after it.

• L2600 traffic share is around 60 % where L1800 portion reduced to 40 % from 90%.
• RRC user are shifting on L2600 layer from L1800 layer. L2600 Layer having almost twofold average user as
compare to L1800.
• L2600 Layer Downlink Payload is nearly 55~60 % higher averagely as compare to L1800 Layer.
• L2600 Layer uplink Payload is nearly 30% ~ 40 % higher averagely as compare to L1800 Layer.
• L2600 Average throughput is around 24 Mbps and nearly 2 ~ 3 Mbps improvement in L1800 layer with average
throughput nearly 12 Mbps.
• L2600 overall uplink throughput is not up to expectation due to high uplink RSSI in L2600 layer (external
interference). Average throughput is nearly 300 Kbps where L1800 having 500 Kbps averagely.
• CSFB attempts noticeably increased on L2600 due to higher number of user shifting on L2600 layer.
• Increase in total payload is visible clearly with improvement of user experience after layers load balancing.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

Performance Summary II (L2600)

• LTE 2600 Performance Vs RSSI detail analysis performed to decide way forward about barring of cells till fixing
of external interference.
• 45 Cells having PUSCH RSSI greater than -105 dB and 80 Cells having PUSCH RSSI greater than -105 dB
• Different EARFCN were assigned on 56 sites after completion of detail 2.6 GHZ band scanning activity. Few
cells still suffering from RSSI > -105 dB from out of total 170 Cells.
• Serious KPI’s degradation noticed on cells where RSSI value is greater than -100 dB. Accessibility, Uplink
throughput and ERAB Drop critically impacting. Recommending here to barred cells with RSSI > -100 dB
immediately since UE can’t even decode RACH response properly under this range of interference.
• Overall excellent results has noticed in KPI’s even with external interference challenge in complete 2.6 GHZ
band.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Vs L1800 Traffic Ratio

• L2600 traffic share is around 60 % where L1800 portion reduced to 40 % from 90%.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Vs L1800 Average User Trend

• RRC user are shifting on L2600 layer from L1800 layer. L2600 Layer having almost twofold average user as
compare to L1800 after final tuning.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 VS L1800 Downlink Volume

• L2600 Layer Payload is nearly 60 % higher averagely as compare to L1800 Layer.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 VS L1800 Uplink Volume

• L2600 Layer uplink Payload is nearly 30% ~ 40 % higher averagely as compare to L1800 Layer.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 VS L1800 DL Throughput

• Both layers DL throughput improved. L2600 abrupt jump in throughput is due to increase of layer usage.
• L2600 Average throughput is around 24 Mbps and nearly 2 ~ 3 Mbps improvement in L1800 layer.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Vs L1800 UL Throughput

• L2600 overall uplink throughput is not up to expectation due to high uplink RSSI in L2600 layer (external
interference) which degrading uplink throughput in L2600.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Vs L1800 UL Throughput

• Increase in total payload is visible clearly with improvement of user experience after layer load balancing.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Vs L1800 Traffic Ratio

• L2600 traffic share is around 60 % where L1800 portion reduced to 40 % from 90%.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 VS L1800 ERAB Drop

• L2600 ERAB drop is higher due to external interference across complete 2.6 GHZ band.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Vs L1800 CSFB Attempts

• CSFB attempts noticeably increased on L2600 due to higher number of user shifting on L2600 layer.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

LTE Performance Vs RSSI
analysis
 L2600 Payload VS RSSI

• Payload remain very less on cells where RSSI Value is greater than -100 dB which confirming to keep
barred cells lower than -100 dB specially till fixing of external interference on band.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 ERAB Drop VS RSSI

• ERAB drop remains very high once cell having RSSI value greater than – 100 dB which confirming to keep
barred cells lower than -100 dB specially till fixing of external interference on band.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 RRC SR VS RSSI

• Accessibility is seriously degraded when RSSI > -100 dB

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 DL Throughput VS RSSI

• Average downlink throughput remains lower on cells where RSSI is greater than – 100 dB
• DL throughput is less impacted as compare to uplink because RSSI is higher in Uplink.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Uplink Throughput VS RSSI

• Uplink throughput is severely degraded with RSSI greater than -100 dB

• Uplink throughput badly degraded in L2600 due to high uplink RSSI in network due to external
interference across L2600 complete band.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Cells PUSCH RSSI Level

• Nearly 45 Cells are still suffering from external interference. Having PUSCH RSSI greater than -105 dB but
with this RSSI level, Overall performance is very satisfactory.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Cells PUCCH RSSI Level

• Nearly 80 Cells are still suffering from external interference. Having PUCCH RSSI greater than -105 dB but
with this RSSI level, Overall performance is very satisfactory.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 LTE 2600 Band wise
Performance (4 Different
EARFCN)
 L2600 Band wise Performance

• Different EARFCN were assigned on 56 sites after completion of detail 2.6 GHZ band scanning activity.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Band wise Performance (Traffic)

• EARFCN 3275 was carrying highest traffic due to higher number of total cells.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Band wise Performance (ERAB Drop)

• All bands are showing high drop in busy hour due to different external interference levels in different
cells.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Band wise Performance (DL Throughput)

• All EARFCN showing good average DL throughput.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Band wise Performance (UL Throughput)

• All EARFCN showing acceptable average UL throughput in external interference environment.

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved

 L2600 Band wise Performance (RSSI Level)

• Few cells still having suffering from RSSI > -105 dB

Copyright© 2014 MTN Irancell. All rights reserved