PROPAGATION CHARACTERISTICS OF HORIZONTALLY AND
VERTICALLY POLARIZED ELECTRIC FIELDS IN AN INDOOR
ENVIRONMENT: SIMPLE MODEL AND RESULTS
Persefoni Kyritsi,Donald C.Cox
David Packard Electrical Engineering Building
350 Serra Mall, Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-95 15
Abstract- In this paper we will present measurement results
that demonstrate the different propagation characteristics of
the vertical and horizontal polarizations and their cross-
correlation coupling under line-of-sight and non-line-of-
sight conditions. We will also present a simplified model for
the propagation environment that uses an approach similar
to the method of images, and achieves results that match the
measurements.
I. INTRODUCTION
Assume an indoors wireless system and let for example
the transmitter antenna be a vertically polarized dipole.
Depolarization is defined as coupling, due to the interaction
with the environment, into a state of polarization orthogonal
to the original state of polarization, so that some of the
power incident at the receiver may be carried by a
horizontally polarized wave. Such coupling occurs as a
result of oblique reflections from the walls as well as due to
scattering from indoor clutter, such as furniture. Reflection
off horizontal and vertical surfaces such as the floors, the
ceiling, or the walls would otherwise preserve the
transmitted polarization.
The propagation of polarized electric field has been
extensively studied in the context of polarization diversity
for portable communications systems [ 11. Polarization
diversity is a technique that mitigates deep fading due to
random handset orientation and multi-path propagation.
A different context within which the effect of electric
field polarization has been studied is the area of computer-
based tools for propagation prediction [2]-[3]. The purpose
of such tools is to avoid over-designing indoors wireless
systems, or performing costly site-specific measurements
and still provide sufficient propagation prediction. These
tools estimate the average signal strength over an area a few
wavelengths across. They are also used to calculate the
average interference power from adjacent co-channel base-
stations. Polarization of the electric field is considered in
these tools to assess depolarization losses.
The field of multiple element communications systems
has renewed the interest in the propagation characteristics of
horizontally and vertically polarized electric fields. Such
systems have been developed to maximize the achievable
data rates for wireless applications. Their spectral efficiency
0-7 803-7005 -810 1B10.00 0 200 1 IEEE 1422
depends on the average received power as well as the
decorrelation properties of the equivalent sub-channels. The
issue of polarization is pertinent because polarization
coupling tends to result in a lower average received power
(most of the energy stays in the same polarization), but it
results in a higher sub-channel decorrelation.
11. METHODOF IMAGES FORWAVEGUIDES
The method of images is commonly used to analyze
electromagnetic problems in the presence of perfectly
conducting boundaries.
A . Point Source Above Infinite Pelfectly Conducting Plane
Assume a perfectly conducting plane that extends
infinitely on the plane y=O, and a point source at a location
(0, d, 0), d>O. We want to calculate the electric field at any
point (x,y,z) in the positive y half-space (we know that the
electric field is zero at any point in the negative y half-
space). An equivalent representation is to assume the image
of the original source at the point (0, -d, 0) and to neglect
the perfectly conducting surface. The electric field can then
be calculated as the sum of the electric fields of the original
source and its image. If the source is vertically polarized,
then the reflection coefficient off the conductor is 1 and the
image has the same sign as the original. If the source is
horizontally polarized, then the reflection coefficient off the
conductor is -1, and the image has the opposite sign. These
sign adjustments are necessary for the satisfaction of the
boundary conditions on the plane y=O.
If the boundary is NOT perfectly conducting but rather
the surface of a dielectric material, then the above approach
can be used as an approximation of the true physical picture.
If R is the reflection coefficient off the surface, then the
transmitted signal from the image will be scaled by R.
B. Point Source Between Two Infinite Peflectly
Conducting Planes
Again assume a point source at a location (0, d, 0)
between two infinite perfectly conducting planes y=-a and
y=a (Idlea). An equivalent picture would be to assume no
perfectly conducting boundaries and an infinite string of
image sources at locations (0, 2na+(-l)"d, 0), for n integer.
Again if the reflection coefficient is R, then the signal from
the nthimage will be scaled by RI”’.
In the lossless case, one would have to consider an
infinite number of images. In the lossy case, the strength of
the images decreases with distance and one need only
consider a limited number thereof.
C. Point Source in a Waveguide
Assume an infinite waveguide, parallel to the z axis
with perfectly conducting boundaries at the planes x=+a,
y=+b, as in Fig. 1. Assume a point source at a location
(d,,d,,O) (Id,l<a, I d, I<b). Removing the boundaries would
create an infinite grid of images on the z=O plane at
locations (2na+(-l)”d,, 2mb+(- l)md,, 0), n,m integers.
If R, is the reflection coefficient off the waveguide walls
at x=+a, and R, the reflection coefficient off the walls at
y=fb, then the signal from the image (n, m) should be
scaled by R l ’ R y ‘.
The roles of vertical and horizontal polarization depend
on the surface of reference. The polarization for example
that is ‘vertical’ with respect to the boundaries x=+a is
‘horizontal’ with respect to the boundaries y=+b.
If we approximate the hallway of a building as a
waveguide, then the walls are better represented as dielectric
materials while the floor and the ceiling are commonly
better represented by high dielectric constant or conducting
surfaces (reinforced concrete and corrugated steel being
common building materials). In that case the vertical and
horizontal polarization propagation characteristics are not
identical. For the floor and the ceiling the reflection for both
polarizations is high. However, the two polarizations have
different reflection coefficients for reflections off the wall
surfaces. The horizontally polarized waves (polarization
parallel with respect to some walls) undergo a Brewster
angle phenomenon, and penetrate the walls without any
reflection at all. At angles near the Brewster angle, the
reflection is not zero but still greatly reduced. No such
effects are present for the vertical polarization
(perpendicular to the walls). Therefore one would expect
lower received power for the horizontal polarization in the
waveguide than for the vertical one. This simple model does
not account for cross-polarization coupling.
t
-+-
B I B
B I B
L - l
-1+’ 1- -
‘I’
-+- B I B
B I B
Fig. 1: Point source in an infinite waveguide
1423
A8
P
I
MLLWAY ,
Fig. 2: Building layout
111. MEASUREMENT
SETUP AND PROCESSING
The measurements were taken on the second floor of the
Lucent Crawford Hill Laboratory, a building that houses
approximately 150 people. The hallway measurements were
taken in the building’s main corridor, which is straight, 390-
ft long, 6 feet wide and lined with offices (typically 10xlOft)
on one side and laboratories (typically 12x24ft) on the other.
No measurements were taken in the second corridor that
intersects the first one in a ‘T’ shape. Inside walls are built
of wood and wallboard; outside walls are largely glass.
Ceilings and floors are made of reinforced concrete over
steel plates. The average hallway height is 10 ft.
Both the transmitter and the receiver array were placed
at a height of 6 feet. The transmitter array was placed 82.5 ft
from the eastern end of the hallway and 2ft from the
northern wall of the hallway, pointing west. The receiver
was wheeled to the desired position along the hallway at-
distances 3ft-246ft from the transmitter at 3 ft. In the labs,
the receiver was again wheeled to the desired position,
which was 8 ft north of the east-west line defined by the
transmitter (Fig. 1).
The elements were folded cavity backed slot antennas
mounted on 2’x2’ panels. These have a hemispherical gain
pattern and measurements were taken for the east and west
orientation in the hallway and all four cardinal orientations
in the labs. 12 transmitters and 15 receivers were used,
arranged in a square grid. The separation between adjacent
elements was 8cm (a half wavelength) and the antennas
were arranged with alternating polarizations as in Fig. 3 (H:
horizontal, V: vertical).
The transmitted power was set to 9.2 dbm and was
equally divided on all the transmitters. The frequency of
operation was 1.95GHz, and the signal bandwidth was
30kHz.
TRANSMlTTER SIDE RECEIVER SIDE
Fig. 3: Antenna layout
 Average power roll-off with distance
-30I I
Previous measurements taken in the same building have
shown that the delay spread is in the order of lp [ 5 ] , [ 6 ] ,so
_.________._____~__
HH 0.0162; 0.0178
;
for the purpose of this experiment we can assume the -40
channel gain from each transmitter to each receiver to be a -45
complex scalar (flat fading). E
The transmitted signals are fully co-channel, that is they c
occupy the same frequency band. In order to calculate the -55
channel complex gains, the system had incorporated a -60
training phase that was k 2 0 symbols long. During this
phase, each antenna transmitted a row of a MxL Fourier
matrix (orthogonal rows), appropriately scaled to the
transmit power. At the receivers the channel estimate was
computed by applying the pseudo-inverse of the transmitted
training matrix to the received training matrix (since the -80 I I
50
I
100
I
150
I
200 250
transmitted matrix was Fourier, its pseudo-inverse was Distance in feel
simply the Hermitian transpose of the original matrix, so no Fig. 5 Power dependence on distance in the hallway
pre-computation of the pseudo-inverse was required).
Synchronization was provided by a cable connecting the A hallway can be modeled as a lossy waveguide where a
transmitter and the receiver arrays. e-&power roll-off law would apply. We fit a curve of the
Let Tij be the channel complex gain between transmitter j form e -dto the measurements (ain ft-'). The results appear
and receiver i. The purpose of this study is to investigate the in Fig. 5. We observe a steep power drop at about 40 ft. This
distance dependence of the received power as a function of is where power is coupled into the intersecting corridor. As
the transmitter and receiver polarization. In order to achieve expected, the loss factor is higher for the horizontal
some spatial averaging, we will average over all transmit- polarization. This effect becomes more pronounced if we
receive pairs of the polarization in question. Let HT, HR be concentrate on the distances larger than 50ft (alim),
i.e. if we
the sets of horizontally polarized transmitters and receivers neglect the effect of the inter-secting corridor. The cross-
respectively, and VT, VR be the sets of vertically polarized polarization loss is -15dB and the power roll-off factor is
transmitters and receivers respectively. So for example roughly the same for both cross-polarizations (0.019 ft-').
when we study the cross-polarization coupling from a
horizontally polarized transmitter to a vertically polarized V. MEASUREMENT
RESULTSIN THELABS
receiver we will average the channel gain over the set HV =
{(i,j), i e V ~ , j € H T l . An added parameter in the labs is the orientation of the
antenna array. We fit curves of the form dadand d" to the
measured data. In table I, we present the values for the
rv. MEASUREMENT
RESULTSIN THEHALLWAY parameters a and y that we found and the corresponding
errors. Clearly, E+<&, in a lab, and the average received
Our results agree with the results presented in [7], as power is better approximated as a d' function of distance, as
shown in Fig. 4.Small discrepancies can be attributed to the one would expect in a rich scattering environment.
different frequency (815MHz/ 1.95GHz) and to the different TABLE I
antenna heights (loft/ 6 ft) in the two experiments.

ni.t.nc. I" b.1

Fig. 4. Comparison with previous measurements

1424
 -60

-70
E
%!
.s -80
L
PI

a
z
-90

-100
10' 1o2
-100 '
IO' 1o2
Distance (R) Distance (R)
VtoH VtoV

E
e3c
.-
L

H
a

-100 I
IO' 1o2 1o3
Distance (R) Distance (R)
Fig. 6: Power dependence on distance in the labs

Indeed even graphically we notice that power falls off as We considered two sets of elements. The first set
d.' There is a loss of about 15dB incurred by going into the contained only vertically polarized elements on both the
labs and losing the strong line-of-sight component relative transmitter and the receiver sides (the mildly shaded
to the hallway. We observe that the cross-polarization elements in figure 2). The second set contained only
coupling in the labs is much higher (-3dB). Finally the horizontally polarized elements (the more shaded elements
system behavior is similar for all antenna orientations. in figure 2). This will enable some spatial averaging, but
will avoid the computational complexity of including all
VI. COMPARISON
WITHTHEORY antenna elements.
For each set of antennas, we considered distances
between loft and 250 ft, with a step size of loft. The field
from each transmitter to each receiver was calculated as the
sum of the fields from its images. This is equivalent to
coherent addition as opposed to incoherent addition of the
signals that would only sum the powers. The power was
then averaged over all combinations.
In order to account for the fact that the method of images
cannot describe complex structures such as the intersecting
corridor, we present the results for distances greater than
50ft. Also in order to normalize for the transmit power, the
simulated and the measured data were set to the same value
at a distance of 60ft. This will allow us to study the roll-off
behavior independently of the absolute power levels.
Fig. 7 shows the results of our comparison. We observe
RX RY that indeed the method of images captures the polarization
Horizontal .\/=
e. cos e, -E,
effect that was experimentally observed. The power roll-off
polarization
(//walls)
1
,/m2
e, - E , cos
is faster for the horizontally polarized waves (polarization
parallel to the walls). We also observe that it overestimates
the roll-off factor a.
Vertical
polarization -1
,/= e. - cos e,
(Iwalls) -4 e. +COS ei

1425
 -35
1 I
1 -
-.-.
Measured H toH
M. of Images H toH
Measured V to V
I I I J
-65‘
50 la, 150 200
Distance in feet
Fig. 7: Comparison of the measurements to the Method of Images
The discrepancies are due to the larger step size in the
calculation with the method of images, the imperfect
knowledge of the dielectric properties of the material of the
walls, and the inherent limitations of the method of images.
The floor and the ceiling are assumed to be perfectly
conducting, which they are not. They are also assumed to be
perfectly smooth, which they also are not. Imperfections
would increase back-scattering and cross-polarization
coupling. It is also assumed that the ceiling is at a constant
height, however the position of the reflecting surfaces
varies. As for the walls, we have ignored the existence of
doors and openings that allow coupling into the rooms.
Finally this very simple model cannot capture the effect of
cross-polarization coupling.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we presented measurement results that
demonstrate the different propagation characteristics of the
vertical and horizontal polarizations.
The measurements showed that power falls off faster for
horizontally polarized waves under strong line-of-sight
conditions in a hallway, whereas this is not so when the
line-of-sight component is not dominant. The explanation
for this phenomenon is the following: in a hallway the floor
and the ceiling can be treated as perfectly conducting
surfaces, whereas the walls are more closely approximated
as dielectric materials. Under those conditions horizontally
polarized waves (polarization parallel to the walls) undergo
a Brewster angle phenomenon and penetrate the walls with
1I little reflection back into the hall. Vertically polarized waves
do not suffer a similar effect and remain constrained in the
hall way.
The cross-polarization levels under strong line-of-sight
conditions are around -15 dB. In the labs however the cross-
polarization is -3dB, and the two polarizations display
similar power roll-off behaviors.
We verified these experimental results by introducing a
simple model using the method of images. This mode,
because of its abstraction, fails to capture the cross-
polarization effects. It deviates for the measurements since it
is not an accurate ray-tracing tool, specific for this
environment. However it successfully captures the different
power roll-off behavior for the horizontal and the vertical
250
polarized signals.
REFERENCES
[ 11 S.A. Bergmann, H.W. Arnold, “Polarization diversity in
portable communications environment”, Electronic
Letters, May 22, 1986, Vol. 22, No. 11, pp. 609-610.
[2] D.Chizhik, J. Ling, R.A. Valenzuela, “ The effect of
electric field polarization on indoor propagation”,
International Conference on Universal Personal
Communications ’98 (ICUPC ’98), 1998, pp.459-462.
31 R.A. Valenzuela, D. Chizhik, J. Ling, “Measured and
predicted correlation between local average power and
small scale fading in indoor wireless communications
channels”, IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference,
Ottawa, May 1998.
41 D. Cox, R. Murray, H. Arnold, A. Norris, M.
Wazowicz, “Cross-polarization coupling measured for
800MHz radio transmission in and around houses and
large buildings”, IEEE Trans. on Antennas and
Propagation, Vol. AP-34, No.1, Jan. 1989, pp. 83-87.
[5] D.M.J. Devasirvatham, “Time delay spread and signal
level measurements of 850 MHz radio waves in
building environments”, E E E Trans. on Antennas and
Propagation, Vol. 34, No.11, November 1986.
[6] D.M.J. Devasirvatham, “ A comparison of delay spread
and signal level measurements within two dissimilar
office buildings”, IEEE Trans. on Antennas and
Propagation, Vol. 35, No.3, March 1987, pp. 319-324.
[7] R.R. Murray, H.W. Arnold, D.C. Cox, “815 h4Hz
Radio attenuation measured within a commercial
building”, Symp. Digest IEEE Antennas and
Propagation Symposium, Philadelphia, PA, June 9- 13,
1986, pp. 209-212.
I426