This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal.
Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION
A Roadside Scattering Model for the
Vehicle-to-Vehicle Communication Channel
Lin Cheng, Member, IEEE, Daniel D. Stancil, Fellow, IEEE, and Fan Bai, Member, IEEE
Abstract—Achieving accurate and effective modeling of the
vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication channel has proven to be
a challenging task, particularly owing to the highly dynamic na-
ture of vehicular environments. V2V channels generally may have
contributions from the line-of-sight path, reflections from large
stationary and moving objects such as bridges and other vehicles,
and a diffuse base from large numbers of small stationary objects
in the environment. We propose a new geometrical model for the
diffuse component based on scattering objects distributed along
the roadside, and use this model to predict the Doppler spectrum
and angle-of-arrival distribution associated with this component
for various V2V scenarios. In contrast with previous roadside
scattering models that sum the contributions from large numbers
of randomly-generated scattering objects, our model assumes a
uniform linear distribution along the roadside. This permits a
computationally efficient, closed-form model. Comparisons with
on-road measurement data as well as the double ring model
demonstrate the validity and effectiveness of the proposed model.
Index Terms—Propagation channel, geometrical modeling,
VANET.
I. I NTRODUCTION
EHICULAR ad hoc networks (VANETs) have recently
V attracted a great deal of attention from the intelligent
transportation system research community. While traditional
transportation information systems send collected traffic data
to central processing units before distributing back to drivers,
vehicles in a VANET can form networks themselves to
exchange information directly in single or multiple hops.
This capability features the benefit of low cost and easy
deployment. VANET also supports a wide range of safety, con-
venience or entertainment services among vehicles. Example
applications include emergency braking, hazardous location
notifications, efficient transportation to avoid traffic congestion
or construction sites, and internet access/infotainment in the
vehicle.
To facilitate the information delivery in VANET, a message
from a source vehicle should be able to propagate reliably
to reach the destination vehicles in high-speed and on-road
environments. Clearly, this imposes a challenge in designing
robust vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication systems to
combat impairments incurred by rapidly changing wireless
channels.
Manuscript received March 1, 2012; revised July 22, 2012. The associate
editor coordinating the review of this paper and approving it for publication
was NAME.
L. Cheng is with Trinity College, Hartford, CT, 06106, USA (e-mail:
lin.cheng@trincoll.edu).
D. Stancil is with North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 27695,
USA (e-mail: ddstancil@ncsu.edu).
F. Bai is with General Motors Research Center, Warren, MI, 48090, USA.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JSAC.2013.SUP.0513040
0733-8716/13/$31.00 
1
While cellular wireless channels are well studied, V2V
systems feature mobile-to-mobile communications with max-
imum relative speeds in excess of 90m/s. Moreover, the
arrival angles are no longer uniform owing to the similar
height of transmitter and receiver antennas and road traffic.
To make things worse, heights of adjacent trees, houses and
pedestrians resemble the heights of the transmit and receive
antennas. All these make the V2V channel different than
well-understood fixed-to-mobile scenarios. Moreover, since
the message characteristics vary significantly across different
applications, the transmissions have to be judiciously allocated
to match the specific communication patterns that character-
ize various applications. The uniform distribution of arrival
angles, although straightforward and widely used in cellular
designs, is not adequate to achieve this objective.
There exist several general strategies to mathematically
model the V2V propagation channel. Perhaps the most direct
strategy is by empirical measurements at the specific site of
interest. Our previous narrow-band [1] and wide-band [2] V2V
channel characterization is exactly based on this measurement-
based approach. We performed measurement campaigns at
different sites representing highway, suburban and rural envi-
ronments. A second approach, perhaps less labor intensive but
still site-specific, is to develop a microscopic electromagnetic
ray-tracing computer-model to approximate the particular site
under investigation [3].
While these approaches produce quantitatively accurate
models for the site’s propagation complexities (e.g., a par-
ticular segment along a highway), it is not easy to generalize
an abstraction model. In a measurement based model, while
one could take great care to describe the measurement envi-
ronment, it still might be unclear which factors are important
to a given aspect of the data. While the microscopic ray-
tracing approach could be generalized to a wider class of
environments with many simulations over many scenarios,
large computational complexities are expected.
Proposed Approach. In contrast to our previous
measurement-based approaches for V2V channel
characterization [1], we recently introduced a simple
geometrical model to encapsulate the essence of a class
of V2V propagation environments [4]. In the present
work we describe this model in greater detail, discuss its
dependence on key geometrical parameters, expand the
model to include angle-of-arrival distributions, present a more
detailed comparison with measured Doppler spectra, and
compare with the Doppler spectra obtained from the standard
double-ring model.
The Doppler spectrum is important because it determines
the channel transience, while the angle-of-arrival distribution
c 2013 IEEE
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
2 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION
is an important factor in the MIMO capacity of the chan-
nel. Compared with statistical models, a geometrical model
based on the physics of moving objects potentially offers
improved insights and accuracy. This, in turn, leads to more
reliable radios and systems. In particular, the benefits of
our proposed model are two-fold: (1) our model enables an
accurate representation of realistic V2V fading environments
in a computationally manageable fashion, providing a solid
basis for the simulation [5], [6] or emulation [7] of vehicular
systems; (2) our model could provide guidance to the design
and implementation of empirical vehicular systems. In addi-
tion, our geometric model is complimentary to empirical V2V
channel models since the latter neither provides any physical
insight into the form and behavior of the spectra nor suggests
how changes in the environment will manifest themselves in
the Doppler spectra.
Contribution. In this work we introduce a new geometrical
model based on objects distributed along the roadside. While
other authors have proposed models based on objects along
the roadside [8]–[10], the paths were modeled by generating
a large number of randomly-placed scatterers and explicitly
summing the contributions from each. In contrast, we show
that the key features of many spectra can be well-described
by assuming a linear arrangement of uniformly-distributed
objects. This permits closed-form expressions for the spectra,
resulting in significantly-reduced computational requirements.
Typical representative objects include trees, vegetation, and
irregular small buildings such as houses. Advantages of the
model include the following:
• Compared with the basic double-ring model, scattering
objects distributed along the roadside is a better descrip-
tion of the VANET environment than the assumption
of scattering objects uniformly distributed around the
vehicles, when the number of lanes is small and the traffic
is not congested.
• The model enables a physics-based calculation of the
Doppler spectrum and angle-of-arrival distribution that
can be compared directly with measurements.
• Doppler spectra from the new model are compared with
measurements, and are found to be in better agreement
than the double-ring model.
• Unlike ray-tracing models, the new model does not
require the detailed specification of large numbers of
objects in the environment. Instead, a relatively small
number of parameters is needed, e.g., the density, reflec-
tivity, and distance of the objects.
In addition to providing insight into the behavior of the
wireless channel, our model can be used as a critical enabling
component in vehicular network validation platforms such
as wireless network simulators and emulators. In particular,
our model has recently been implemented in an empirical
wireless emulation platform [11]. Their study illustrated that
our model reasonably captures the characteristics of highly
dynamic vehicle-to-vehicle channels. At the same time, their
study also demonstrated that our proposed model is relatively
simple to implement using limited computational resources.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. After a review
of prior work (Section II), we formulate in Section III the
geometric modeling problem. Section IV derives the Doppler
spectrum using the geometrical model. Section V discusses
the behavior of the model. The evaluation with experimental
results is discussed in Section VI. After briefly discussing
the role of mobile scatterers in Section VII, we conclude in
Section VIII.
II. R ELATED W ORK
In recent years, due to the advent of VANET, the issue of
efficient and accurate channel modeling has received increased
attention. We briefly review related works which are directly
relevant to our study.
The starting point of V2V communication is the dedicated
short range communications (DSRC) specifications [12]. The
authors in [13] examined time-sensitive safety applications
and discussed the importance of radio channel modeling
to ensure proper link performance for such applications. In
particular, the obtained results show that conducting wireless
V2V communication studies without properly modeling the
radio channel conditions could significantly affect the accuracy
of the obtained conclusions. A recent overview of channel
characterization and modeling has been presented by Meck-
lenbrauker, et al. [14]. They emphasized the importance of
accurate propagation channel models for assessing the impact
on data packet reliability and latency in V2X channels.
There have been a handful of measurement based works
to model the V2V channel. Narrow-band measurements and
analysis of the inter-vehicle transmission channel at 5.2 GHz
are reported in [15]. [16] describes the results of a channel
measurement and modeling campaign for the V2V channel
in the 5-GHz band in Ohio, USA. Measurement results
for delay spread, amplitude statistics, and correlations are
discussed. [17], [18] reported measured joint Doppler-delay
power profiles for V2V Communications at 2.4 GHz in
Atlanta, USA. In [19], the authors extend the work presented
in [17], [18], detailing a BER-Based partitioned model for a
2.4 GHz V2V expressway channel. A tapped delay line model
for a 2x2 MIMO system at 2.4GHz was reported in [20],
including Doppler spectra. The experimental spectra were
fitted using several known spectral shapes. Six empirically-
based tapped delay line models for 5.9 GHz were reported
in [21], and measured Doppler spectra at 5.9 GHz were
reported in [22]. [23] reported characterizations of V2V radio
channels from measurements at 5.2 GHz measured in Sweden.
[24] conducted measurement in Michigan and analyzed the
wireless channel impairments in V2V communications. These
reported works cover a number of different V2V settings in
different geographical and traffic conditions. The environments
range from expressway to suburban street. Measurements are
also provided for some roadside-to-vehicle channels. These
measurements lead to empirical models; in particular, data
from the 5.9 GHz band can help develop models designed for
use with the DSRC standard. Typically, the measurements are
modeled with a tapped delay line. The tap amplitude statistics
can be Rayleigh or Ricean. The authors of [6] have tested
and validated a physical layer simulator integrated with the
popular NS-3 network simulator. The channel modes adopt
the tapped-delay line model from G. Acosta-Marum et al’s
work [17], [18], [21], [22], where each tap is characterized by
a Rician or Rayleigh fading process.
Ray-tracing techniques have also been proposed to model
the V2V channel. In [3] the authors model typical roadside
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
CHENG et al.: A ROADSIDE SCATTERING MODEL FOR THE VEHICLE-TO-VEHICLE COMMUNICATION CHANNEL
structures as scattering objects. The ray-tracing technique is
used to elaborate the models and analyze transmission system
performance. While accurate ray-tracing channel models can
be obtained for site-specific cases, this ray-tracing approach
is generally computationally intensive.
There have been recent proposals to model wideband
multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) mobile-to-mobile
channels [9], [25]–[27]. [25] modeled the MIMO narrowband
fading channel for mobile-to-mobile communications based
on the two-ring model. [9] presented a new wideband MIMO
model based on extensive MIMO channel measurements
performed at 5.2 GHz in highway and rural environments in
Lund, Sweden.
The authors of [9] presented data showing that the observed
Doppler shift versus time is consistent with scatterers located
along a line parallel to the road. However, their focus was
on the time-domain response, and they did not discuss the
Doppler spectrum. Their general model included distributions
of fixed, mobile, and diffuse scatterers. The channel was
computed by summing the contributions of large numbers of
these scatterers. A reduced complexity approach to calculating
the model in [9] was presented in [10].
[25] modeled the MIMO narrowband fading channel for
mobile-to-mobile communications based on the two-ring
model. A three-dimensional reference model for wide-band
MIMO mobile-to-mobile channels is discussed in [26], along
with its corresponding first- and second-order channel statis-
tics. [27] reported a generic and adaptive stochastic reference
model for MIMO mobile-to-mobile Ricean fading channels.
This model employs a combined two-ring model and elliptical-
ring model.
A number of geometrical models have been proposed in
the cellular communications context. While many reported
works assume the scattering cross section of the scatterers is
isotropic, their density varies with location. In addition, they
typically characterize the scatterer’s spatial distribution rela-
tive to the transmitter and the receiver, based on the application
scenario. Reported models and representative literature can be
broadly classified as follows:
• Circular scattering model. A nice summary is given
in [28]. The circular scattering model is widely used in
macro cell type of environments.
• Discrete uniform model [29].
• Elliptical scattering model [28]. As another example, [30]
proposed a geometrically-based model for line-of-sight
multipath radio channels. Elliptical models are applied
to a micro- or pico-cell type of environments in cellular
studies.
• Gaussian angle of arrival model [31].
• Ring model [32] and the extended double ring model
for mobile-to-mobile scenarios [33], [34]. The typical
assumption here is that small-scale fading has Rayleigh
statistics. These authors generalized the classical Jakes
spectrum [35], derived new envelope autocorrelation
functions and related Doppler spectra. [34] reported an
effective method to simulate such a channel, using the
sum of sinusoids method.
The focus of our work is the Doppler spectrum associated
with the diffuse scatterers. In contrast to previous models that
assume scattering objects are distributed uniformly around a
3
circular or elliptical ring surrounding the vehicle or vehicles,
we propose a model based on a uniform distribution of scat-
tering objects along the roadside. We believe this model more
closely approximates many vehicular environments. However,
in contrast with [9], [10], we do not sum the contributions
from a large number of discrete paths, but rather analytically
sum the contributions from a continuum of paths. The result
is a model with significantly lower complexity than [10].
Our work also differs from empirical channel models re-
ported from wideband measured data at 5.3 GHz [36], [37],
because we are dealing with low-height antenna mobile to
mobile communication channel at 5.9 GHz, while in their
work: (1) The transmitting antenna was about 45 meters above
ground level, representing a case with the base station antenna
over rooftops. Our transmitting antenna is lower than 2 meters.
(2) They deal with the fixed-to-mobile case at 5.3 GHz, rather
than the mobile-to-mobile communication channel at 5.9 GHz.
III. D ESCRIPTION OF THE M ODEL
The main objective of this section is to formulate the
geometrical model based on the observations from on-road
scenarios. To accomplish this goal, we first present observa-
tions made from our on-road measurements. We then introduce
the proposed parameterized street scattering model.
A. On-road Measurements
To motivate our model, we start by examining the on-road
Doppler spectrum. We have made extensive on-road Doppler
spectrum measurements using the RF system we reported
in [1]. Our system features integration of GPS receivers which
allows channel characterization as a function of location pa-
rameters such as separation, speed, etc. Fig. 1 depicts a sample
Doppler spectrum. As shown in the figure, a line-of-sight path
usually exists while traveling on the road, unless vehicles are
making turns, etc. We confirmed from experimental spectra
that the position of the observed LoS components is associated
with relative velocity [38].
Apart from the LoS components, a lower amplitude struc-
ture is also typically observed in these experimental spectra to
which we refer as a base. While good agreement is observed
on our identification of this base region with the stationary
scattering model [33][34], examples in [38] (see Fig. 1) show
that the base width can be larger than the theoretical case
surrounded by stationary scatterers, for which the base width is
2|vT +vR |/λ. Here vT and vR are the speeds of the transmitter
and receiver, respectively, and λ is the wavelength.
Further examinations suggest the existence of other com-
ponents that were not included in the stationary scatterer
model [33][34]. [38] reported a spectrum recorded with both
vehicles stationary, but with a non-zero base width. This
suggests the existence of moving scatterers in real V2V envi-
ronments. There are also recorded cases with narrow, shifted
peaks and broadened base structures outside ±(vT + vR )/λ.
These components are likely caused by a strong reflection
from a vehicle in the oncoming lane.
We summarize the observed experimental spectra compo-
nents in the V2V environment as follows:
• The line-of-sight component exhibits a Doppler shift
proportional to the relative velocity with minimal Doppler
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
4 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION
Fig. 1. A sample experimental Doppler spectrum with outliers [38].
spreading. This component usually exists, and is usually
the strongest feature.
• A weaker, continuous base pedestal, with contributions
from stationary scattering sources. This component al-
ways exists when the two cars are moving.
• Additional components beyond the base width predicted
by the stationary scatterer model [33][34], owing to mov-
ing scattering objects in the environment, in particular
vehicles in the oncoming lanes. This component is not
always present.
• Although not apparent in Fig. 1, additional components
from large stationary objects may also be present [9],
[10].
B. Parameterized Street Scattering Model
Unlike analytical studies involving isotropic densely scat-
tering environments with no LoS for mobile-to-mobile com-
munications [33], a typical street or highway has trees, houses,
signs, etc., located on both sides of the street. Aiming at an
appropriate parameterized street scattering model for the prop-
agation scenario, we first produce a geometrical abstraction for
such an environment.
Consider the geometry shown in Fig. 2, where the objects
on the side of the road are stationary scatterers. Although
the exact locations of the scattering objects along the road
(horizontal dimensions in Fig. 2) are likely best described
by a random variable, we assume the average density of
these objects is relatively constant in the environment (e.g.,
on average, a tree every 10 meters). We denote the densities
on the left and right sides of the road as ρL,R (objects per
meter). Similarly, in the direction perpendicular to the road
(vertical dimension in Fig. 2), these objects are likely to be
distributed within a range (such as the grey region in Fig. 2).
However, we assume the average distance to these objects is
relatively constant in the environment, and denoted sL,R where
the subscripts refer to the average distance on the left or right.
IV. D OPPLER M ODELING
The main objective of this section is to model the Doppler
components using the parameterized street scattering model.
Fig. 2. Street scattering modeling (adapted from [4]).
Single-bounce scattering is used for explaining the modeling
process. Our approach is described as follows: We first con-
sider scatterers distributed in a cone of small angle, and derive
the mean power arriving in angular elements as a function of
the arrival angles. This function is then transformed into the
frequency domain and linked to street scattering parameters
to allow for easy parameter tuning. We assume the scattering
is incoherent so that the scattered power contributions add.
We derive analytical expressions incorporating propagation
effects and location of the scatterers relative to the transmit
and receive vehicles. The assessment of this model will be
investigated later, in Section VI, by comparing with on-road
measurements.
A. Preliminaries
Consider an on-road example shown in Fig. 2, where we
denote θ to be the incident angle of a wave received by the
vehicle moving at speed v. The apparent change in frequency
is the Doppler shift fd , which is given by
v v
fd = cos θ = fc cos θ = fm cos θ, (1)
λ c
where fm is the maximum Doppler shift which occurs at θ = 0
v
fm = fc , (2)
c
fc is the carrier frequency, λ is the wavelength at fc , and c is
the speed of light.
In a vehicular channel, signals from multiple paths are
received by a moving vehicle so that the observed frequency
of each signal will be Doppler shifted depending on the
component of the vehicle velocity along the direction of
arrival of the path. Based on Equation (2), the Doppler shift
associated with an incoming wave in all multipaths will have
an apparent frequency in the range of fc − fm ≤ f ≤ fc + fm .
Since each multipath will have its own associated frequency
shift, the received spectrum is therefore spread relative to its
transmitted spectrum (Doppler spread).
However, in a V2V channel, each scatterer also receives
a Doppler shifted wave owing to the motion of the transmit
vehicle. The total Doppler shift of the received wave is the
sum of those two components.
B. Power Spectral Density
We assume that the amount of power Pr returning to the
receive antenna from a single scatterer can be described by
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

CHENG et al.: A ROADSIDE SCATTERING MODEL FOR THE VEHICLE-TO-VEHICLE COMMUNICATION CHANNEL 5

the radar equation The magnitude of the power spectral density can now be
2 written
Pt Gt Gr λ 1 1
Pr = σ( 2 )( 2 ), (3)
(4π)3 dt dr Pt Gt Gr λ2 σ 1 1 sρ csc2 θ
|S(f )| = ( 2 )( 2 ) . (11)
where (4π)3 dt dr |df /dθ|
• Pt and Pr are the transmitted and received power, re-
spectively, C. Propagation Considerations
• Gt and Gr are the transmitting and receiving antenna
gain, respectively, As described in the dual slope model, while the power
• σ is the radar cross section of the object (assumed to be initially falls off inversely with distance d squared, after some
isotropic), critical distance dc , the power generally falls off inversely with
• dt is the distance from the transmitter to the object, and the fourth power of d. This applies for both dt and dr here.
dr is the distance from the object to the receiver. Hence we need to develop a dual-mode distance model, which
Consider scatterers within the differential angle dθ about should satisfy the following properties:
the angle θ with respect to the receiving vehicle (Fig. 2). • Although the function is dual-mode (distance squared
Positive values of θ correspond to scattered signals from the or with the fourth power), it should be dimensionally
left side of the road, and negative values of θ correspond to correct.
scattering from the right side. For simplicity, we proceed with • There should be a smooth transition at the critical dis-
an analysis for positive θ only, with ρ = ρL , s = sL . L is the tance.
projected path length along the road from angle θ, and dL is
To meet these criteria, we introduce a dimensionless dis-
the projected path length change along the road from angle ˆ dˆc ) such that
tance function D(d,
dθ.

From the geometry we have ( d̂1 )2 if dˆ ≤ dˆc
s ˆ dˆc ) =
D(d, ˆ
L= . (4) ( d1ˆ )2 ( dd̂c )4 if dˆ > dˆc
tan θ c

Taking the derivative on both sides we have where dˆ ≡ d/dtr and dˆc ≡ dc /dtr are distances normalized to
dL = −s csc2 θdθ. (5) the separation between the transmit and receive vehicles, dtr .
A convenient expression for critical distance is the distance
In the angular range dθ the number of scatterers can therefore at which the 1/r2 model equals the 1/r4 ground reflection
be expressed model, or
−ρdL = sρ csc2 θdθ. (6) 4πht hr
dc = , (12)
λ
The total power arriving within the range of angles dθ is
given by the power from one scatterer (equation (3)) times where ht and hr are the heights of the transmit and receive
the number of scatterers in the length −dL from equation (6). antennas, respectively. However, the effective value of dc that
The result is gives best agreement with some measurements has been ob-
Pt Gt Gr λ2 σ 1 1 served to be smaller than the value given by equation (12) [1].
dP = ( 2 )( 2 )sρ csc2 θdθ. (7)
(4π)3 dt dr
In terms of this distance function, the power spectral density
The power spectral density is given by can be expressed
dP dθ
S(f ) = . (8)
dθ df csc2 θ
|S(f (θ))| = AGr (θ)Gt (θt )D(dˆt , dˆc )D(dˆr , dˆc ) ,
Thus to relate equation (7) to S(f ), we now turn our attention |df /dθ|
to the relationship between frequency and angle. (13)
To the scatterer, the relative speed of the transmit vehicle where
is vt cos(θt ), where θt is the angle of the scatterers as viewed Pt λ2 σŝρ
A= , (14)
by the transmit vehicle (Fig. 3). The scatterer thus observes a (4πdtr )3
Doppler shift of vt cos(θt )/λ.
The wave is then bounced to the receive vehicle. Since the and ŝ ≡ s/dtr is the normalized perpendicular distance to the
speed relative to the scatterer is vr cos(θ), the receive vehicle line of scatterers.
observes an additional shift of vr cos(θ)/λ. The total Doppler Similarly, the angular power density is
shift is therefore
dP df
= |S(f (θ))|| | (W/rad) (15)
f = vt cos(θt )/λ + vr cos(θ)/λ, (9) dθ dθ
from which we obtain Next we describe how we relate the above parameters to the
df dθt geometry. Fig. 3 describes the different situations that could
=− vt sin(θt )/λ − vr sin(θ)/λ. (10) occur.
dθ dθ
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

6 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION

TABLE I
M ODEL PARAMETERS AND THEIR P HYSICAL I NTERPRETATIONS

dtr Distance between the transmit and receive vehicles (m)

vt Speed of the transmit vehicle (m/s)
vr Speed of the receive vehicle (m/s)
sL Distance to the left side of the road (m)
sR Distance to the right side of the road (m)
dc Breakpoint distance for propagation model (m). For d ≤ dc the
signal power is proportional to d12 , while for d > dc the signal
power is proportional to d14
Pt Power radiated by the transmitter (W)
λ Wavelength of the center frequency of the transmission
σ Scattering cross-section of objects along the roadside (m2 )
ρ Linear density of scattering objects along the roadside (m−1 )
Gr (θ) Gain function of receiving antenna as a function of azimuth angle
Gt (θ) Gain function of transmitting antenna as a function of azimuth
angle

v = v = 20 (m/s)
t r
−60
v = 30, v = 20 (m/s)
t r

relative amplitude (dB)

v = 20, v = 30 (m/s)
−70 t r

−80

−90

−100

−110
−1000 −500 0 500 1000
Fig. 3. Different locations of an isolated scatterer relative to the transmitter frequency (Hz)
and receiver (adapted from [4]).
Fig. 4. Dependence of the Doppler spectrum on the speeds of the transmit
and receive vehicles. The transmit vehicle is assumed to be in front. Parameter
values used in the calculation are dtr = 50 m, ŝ = 0.2, dˆc = 2, f = 5.9
D. Different Relative Locations GHz, and AGt Gr = 1.

1) Ahead: The first diagram in Fig. 3 depicts the case when

the scatterer is ahead of both the transmitter and receiver. 3) Behind: The third diagram in Fig. 3 depicts the case
In this case 0 ≤ θ ≤ θai , where θai is the threshold angle when the scatterer is behind both the transmitter and receiver.
between the regions “ahea” and “in-between.” Based on the In this case π/2 < θ ≤ π and π − θai ≤ θt < π. The
geometry we have expressions for dˆr (θ), dˆt (θ), θt (θ), and |S(f )| have the same
ŝ
dˆr = , (16) form as for the “in between” case.
sin θ To summarize, the key parameters of the model along with
their physical interpretations are summarized in Table I.
θai = tan−1 ŝ, (17)
V. M ODEL B EHAVIOR
and
 Having derived the basic components of the model, we now
dˆt = ŝ2 + (ŝ cot(θ) − 1)2 . (18) consider the qualitative dependence of the resulting Doppler
spectrum on the model parameters. Referring to Equations
Given θ, we can derive θt from the geometry (12)-(15), along with the remaining equations in Section IV,
ŝ we see that Pt , σ, ρ and dtr only affect the Doppler spectrum
θt = tan−1 ( ), (19) magnitude – they do not affect the shape of the spectrum. In
ŝ cot(θ) − 1
contrast, λ, vt , vr , ŝ, dˆc , Gt and Gr affect both the magnitude
and and the shape of the Doppler spectrum.
dθt ŝ2 csc2 θ Fig. 4 shows several typical spectra with constant (om-
= . (20) nidirectional) Gt and Gr , fixed values of ŝ, dˆc and λ, but
dθ (ŝ cot(θ) − 1)2 + ŝ2
different values of vt and vr . Both cars are traveling in the
2) In between: The second diagram in Fig. 3 represents same direction. The first observation to the model is that the
the case when the scatterer is in between the transmitter and frequency limits of the spectrum are given by ±(vt + vr )/λ,
receiver. In this case θai < θ ≤ π/2 and π/2 ≤ θt < π − θai . just as in the case of the dual ring model. This can be seen
In this region, θt can be derived from the geometry to be from Equation (9). The largest up-shift comes from objects
far in front of the vehicles, for which Equation (9) gives
θt = π − tan−1 (
ŝ
). (21) f = (vt + vr )/λ with θt = θ = 0. Similarly, the largest
1 − ŝ cot(θ) downshift comes from objects far behind, for which Equation
(9) gives f = −(vt + vr )/λ with θt = θ = π.
The expressions for dˆr (θ), dˆt (θ), and |S(f )| have the same The central peak of the spectrum comes from the scatterers
form as in the “ahead” case. located near the specular point at angle θ0 where dˆt = dˆr , θt =
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
CHENG et al.: A ROADSIDE SCATTERING MODEL FOR THE VEHICLE-TO-VEHICLE COMMUNICATION CHANNEL
Fig. 5. Dependence of the shape of the Doppler spectrum on ŝ, dˆc . The
horizontal axis is frequency, and the vertical axis is the magnitude of the
Doppler power spectral density |S| on a logarithmic scale. Parameter values
used in the calculation are dtr = 50 m, f = 5.9 GHz, vt = vr = 10ms,
and AGt Gr = 1.
Fig. 6. Power density dP/dθ vs. angle of arrival for the Doppler spectra in
Fig. 5. The patterns are normalized to their maximum value, and the radial
scale is 10 dB/div.
π − θ0 , and tan θ0 = 2ŝ. From Equation (9), the frequency of
this peak is given by
vr − vt
f0 = cos θ0 . (22)
λ
Thus when the vehicles are traveling at the same speed, the
spectrum is perfectly symmetric. In contrast, the spectrum
becomes asymmetric when the vehicles have different speeds.
Note that we have labeled the vehicles as “receiver” or “trans-
mitter” as an aid in thinking through the physics. However, it
is important to remember that since the channel is reciprocal,
the spectrum will be the same regardless of which vehicle
is transmitting. The proper way to interpret equation (23) is
that if the vehicle behind is traveling faster, the vehicles will
be closing on one another, and the peak will be up-shifted.
Similarly, when the vehicle in front is faster, the vehicles will
be moving apart, and the peak will be downshifted.
With this understanding of where the components of the
spectrum come from, the effects of the gain patterns Gt and
Gr can be readily inferred. For example, if the gain patterns
are such that they favor the forward direction, then the higher
frequency portion of the spectrum will be stronger, even if
the vehicles are moving with the same speed. Said differently,
any component of the Doppler spectrum can be enhanced
by pointing antennas with gain in the direction of scatterer’s
contributing to that part of the spectrum.
Finally, the dependence of the spectrum shape on ŝ and
dˆc is more involved. Example spectra for realistic ranges of
7
these variables are shown in Fig. 5. When ŝ is small and dˆc is
large, there are high densities of scatterers near θ ≈ θt ≈ 0 and
θ ≈ θt ≈ π, and the reflections from large numbers of these
scatterers experience the lower r12 path loss. As a result, we
see the formation of “rabbit ears” at the edges of the spectra.
When dˆc becomes smaller, then more of the scatterers see a r14
path loss, and the intensity of the “ears” diminishes. Similarly,
when ŝ increases, the total path loss can overwhelm the spikes
in the density of scatterers at θ ≈ θt ≈ 0, π, and the “ears”
can be suppressed. To summarize it, the rabbit ears are most
pronounced when ŝ << 1 and dˆc >> 1, and the spectrum is
the most rounded when ŝ >> 1 and dˆc << 1.
The angular power density as a function of direction is
shown in Fig. 6 for the spectra shown in Fig. 5. The distance
factors D(dˆt , dˆc ) and D(dˆr , dˆc ) suggest that the scatterers
contributing the most power at the receiver are those closest to
the transmit vehicle in the direction θai , and those closest to
the receiver at angle π/2. However, the number of scatterers
per unit angle is larger in the direction θai , so this is the
direction of greatest received angular power density. Conse-
quently, the peaks in the patterns in Fig. 6 occur near the
direction θai = tan−1 ŝ. These peaks are most pronounced
when ŝ << 1 and dˆc >> 1, and least pronounced when
ŝ >> 1 and dˆc << 1.
It is interesting to note that there is no apparent peak in
the angular power density in the direction of the specular
scatterers, θ0 . The peak in the power spectral density corre-
sponding to these scatterers is actually the result of the angular
frequency density function df /dθ, rather than the shorter total
path length to and from the scatterers near the specular point.
VI. M ODEL A SSESSMENT
In Sections IV–V we described the scattering from objects
on the left side of the road, i.e., for θ ≥ 0. To compare with
measurements, scattering from objects on the right side of the
road must also be considered (θ < 0). Consistent with our
incoherent scattering assumption, the total Doppler spectrum
is obtained by summing the power spectral densities from both
sides of the road, i.e., |S| = |SL | + |SR |. Because of the
symmetry of the problem, the computation for θ < 0 can
be replaced with a calculation for θ > 0 as outlined in the
previous section, but with ρL , sL replaced with ρR , sR .
In a practical computation, an array of discrete values of θ
is used to compute corresponding arrays for fL,R and SL,R .
Note, however, that the arrays cannot generally be summed
element-by-element. The reason is that if sL = sR , then the
values of f for each θ will be different, i.e., fL = fR . Instead,
interpolation can be used to estimate values of |SL | and |SR |
at a common set of frequencies and these interpolated values
can then be summed to obtain (|S|, f ).
A. Measurement Description
Field measurements were collected in real, physical envi-
ronments to investigate various V2V communication scenar-
ios. Both the transmit and receive vehicles were driven at
each driver’s prerogative to preserve normal driving behavior.
Continuous Waveform (CW) signals at the designated DSRC
frequency of 5.9 GHz were transmitted. At the receive ve-
hicle, we used automation software to record 200 ms data
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
8 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION
Fig. 7. Model assessment for a representative highway environment. (a)
Satellite photo showing the locations of the transmitter and receiver, (b)
Angular power density from the roadside scattering model, (c) Comparisons
between the measured Doppler spectrum and the predictions from the double-
ring and roadside scattering models.
framesof the signal, at 1-second intervals. These 200 ms data
frames were Fourier transformed to obtain the Doppler spec-
tra. The experiments recorded about 10,000 data frames for
Doppler spectra in highway, suburban and rural environments
in February, May and June 2007 in Pittsburgh, PA. A detailed
description of the system implementation is given in [1].
B. Model Parameter Selection
To assess the model, representative measurements from
each environment were selected. About 30 on-road spectrum
records were randomly chosen from the measured data pool,
10 of each environment. We then extracted the GPS coordi-
nates of these recordings and examined the satellite photos of
these recordings. Based on the satellite photos, we selected
the scenarios depicted in parts (a) of Fig. 7, Fig. 8, Fig. 9 and
Fig. 10 as representative of the highway, suburban and rural
environments. This ensured that the case studies were random
but representative.
The measured parameters for these examples are summa-
rized in Table II. The separation distance and speeds of the
transmitter and receiver were obtained from GPS records, the
distances to the left and right roadsides were estimated from
the satellite photos1, and the value of the propagation model
breakpoint distance was obtained from [1]. The remaining
parameter values were replaced with an overall scaling factor
1 For the highway case, the distances to the tree lines were estimated.
However, a slightly larger value of sR than suggested by the photo was
needed to suppress the “rabbit ears” on the spectrum. For the suburban case,
the estimated distances to the houses were used, while the distances to the
edge of the pavement were used in the rural case.
Fig. 8. Model assessment for a representative suburban environment. (a)
Satellite photo, (b) Angular power density from the roadside scattering model,
(c) Comparisons between measured and predicted Doppler spectra.
that was used to adjust the model to roughly match the
amplitude of the measurements. Similarly, calculations based
on the dual-ring model also employed an adjustable scaling
factor. Consequently, the comparison between models and
measurement should be confined to the shapes of the spectra
only.
Comparisons between the measured spectra, the dual-ring
model, and the roadside scattering model are shown in parts (c)
of Figs. 7–10. Doppler spectra presented in [20] and [22] have
similar qualitative features to the measured spectra reported
here. However, for a strict comparison, the Doppler spectra
from all taps in [20] should be summed. Note that all of the
measured spectra reported here exhibit a line-of-sight path that
is absent in the model calculations shown in the figures. A
method for adding a line-of-sight feature to either model is
outlined in the Appendix. We have omitted this component in
the plots, however, to make it easier to see differences between
the spectra from the two models.
Key differences between the shapes of the spectra between
the two models are (1) the dual-ring model is characterized
by symmetric peaks when the transmitter and receiver speeds
are unequal, while the roadside scattering model exhibits a
single asymmetric peak; and (2) the dual-ring model shows
symmetric peaks at the edges of the spectra only when one
of the vehicles speeds is zero (in which case it reduces to
the Jakes model), while the roadside scattering model exhibits
symmetric edge peaks over a wide range of parameters. The
figures show that in both of these respects, the roadside
scattering model most closely describes the measured spectra.
It is clear that the usefulness of our model and its assumptions
has been demonstrated by the ability of the model to describe
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

CHENG et al.: A ROADSIDE SCATTERING MODEL FOR THE VEHICLE-TO-VEHICLE COMMUNICATION CHANNEL 9

TABLE II
E STIMATED PARAMETERS FOR THE A SSESSMENT

Parameter Highway Suburban Rural1 Rural2

Separation distance dtr (m) 112.1 71.1 60.9 78.5
Transmitter speed vt (m/s) 35.0 10.8 24.7 14.4
Receiver speed vr (m/s) 32.4 8.7 24.2 7.2
Distance to left roadside sL (m) 40 15 10 10
Distance to right roadside sR (m) 20 8 5 5
Propagation model breakpoint distance dc (m) 100 100 100 100

Fig. 9. Model assessment for a representative rural environment (rural 1).

(a) Satellite photo, (b) Angular power density from the roadside scattering Fig. 10. Model assessment for a representative rural environment (rural 2).
model, (c) Comparisons between measured and predicted Doppler spectra. (a) Satellite photo, (b) Angular power density from the roadside scattering
model, (c) Comparisons between measured and predicted Doppler spectra.

the measured spectra in real-world environments; it is often

the case that a model works reasonably well even for situations
beyond the strict validity of its assumptions.
Both models predict the width of the spectra to be 2(vt +
vr )/λ, while we frequently observe the experimental spectra
to be narrower by 10-15%. In the context of the roadside
scattering model, a possible explanation of this is that the
model assumes the road is straight and extents indefinitely to
the front and rear. The energy near the edges of the spectrum
originates with the most distant scattering objects in front and
behind. In actuality, however, bends, hills, and changes in
the density of scattering objects limit the visibility to finite
distances in front and behind. As a result, the largest possible
Doppler shifts are not observed.
The reader may be curious about the asymmetry of our
measured spectra, in that the left, or lower frequency com-
ponents tend to be consistently stronger than the right or
higher frequency components. Careful inspections show that
the asymmetry exists in most of the recorded spectra. This is
likely a systematic error related to antenna gains. The antennas
used in the measurements were vertical wire antennas that
are nominally omni-directional. However, when mounted on
the vehicle, the resulting pattern is likely not to be perfectly
symmetric. Thus one plausible explanation is as follows: by
placing the antenna on the rear right of the vehicle, the gain
is higher to the rear part of the vehicle, compared to the
front part. In our measurements the lower frequency Doppler
components (for example from -3000 Hz to 0 Hz in Fig. 7(c)
come from scatterers to the rear of the receiver car. We believe
this could cause the observed asymmetry.
The angular received power densities predicted by the
roadside scattering model are shown in parts (b) of Figs. 7–
10. Note that owing to the larger distances to the left side
of the road, power scattered from the right side of the
road typically dominates. Also, as discussed previously, the
dominant scattering comes from objects immediately to the
side of the transmitter.
These observations have interesting implications for the
deployment of MIMO in uncongested traffic environments.
The single dominating direction of arrival coupled with the
line-of-sight path (not shown) suggests that 2×2 MIMO would
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
10 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION
be feasible, but the use of more than two antennas is probably
not warranted. Further, the two dominant directions-of-arrival
will be near the forward and rear directions, and typically only
separated by a few degrees in angle. Hence best results would
be obtained with antenna placements giving the best angular
resolution in the forward and rear directions.
VII. D ISCUSSION
Moving Scatters. As discussed in Section III, we ob-
served in some measured spectra additional components be-
yond the base width predicted by the stationary scatterer
model [33][34]. While this phenomenon does not always exist,
it is worthwhile to discuss the impact from moving objects on
the road.
High-speed moving vehicles will introduce additional com-
ponents in the Doppler spectrum, as pointed out in [9], [10].
These components can be relatively strong since the metal
bodies of cars are usually strong reflectors. In particular, vehi-
cles in the oncoming lanes may introduce Doppler components
that go beyond the base width predicted by the stationary
scatterer model, owing to the larger relative speed. In addition,
the changing angles to the moving vehicle will result in a time
varying channel.
In summary, the presence of moving scatterers in the driving
environment can have potential impact on the channel behav-
ior. However, we did not have real-time position information
for vehicles other than the transmitter and receiver in the
present study, so a detailed model is not considered in this
paper.
On the other hand, we believe our geometric model defines
an important component of the V2V channel model, which
can easily be combined with other elements such as moving
scatterers to form a comprehensive model.
Generality of Our Model. We believe that our geometrical
road-side scattering model could also lend itself to extracting
Doppler spectra at different delays. Physically, this is because
different sections of scatterers along the roadside contribute to
different portions of the Doppler spectrum, and these sections
are located at different distances. Consequently, it is possible
to identify which portions of the Doppler spectrum result from
energy arriving in a particular time delay interval. However,
the generalization of our proposed geometric model merits
itself an independent study, as part of our future works.
VIII. C ONCLUSIONS
Effective channel models are necessary for efficient simu-
lation of the propagation channel in the context of VANETs.
This paper proposed a new geometrical model for the V2V
channel based on the assumption of a uniform linear distribu-
tion of small scattering objects along the roadside. Compar-
isons with on-road measurements show that the new model
describes the diffuse base component of Doppler spectra in
uncongested environments more accurately than the double-
ring model. The new model also describes the direction-
of-arrival distribution of power associated with the roadside
scatterer distribution. The shapes of the spectrum and direction
of arrival distribution depend primarily on the speeds of the
transmit and receive vehicles, their separation, the distances to
each side of the road, the wavelength, the critical distance at
which the power decay becomes proportional to r14 instead of
1
r 2 , and the gains of the transmitting and receiving antennas.
The density and scattering cross-sections of the scatterers
affect the magnitudes, but not the shapes of these functions.
Unlike previous roadside scattering models that require the
contributions from a large number of small scattering objects
to obtain the Doppler spectrum, the new model leads to closed
form expressions that can be rapidly calculated.
A PPENDIX : A DDING L INE - OF -S IGHT
A strong line-of-sight component usually exists in the
Doppler spectrum. The line-of-sight component exhibits a
Doppler shift proportional to the relative velocity without
Doppler spreading. However, a finite linewidth is usually
observed during our field measurements. We believe this is
owing to the finite resolution of the signal analyzer and the
residual motion in the environment. The latter is confirmed
with our measured spectrum when the transmit and receive
vehicles are stationary.
A Lorentzian line-shape function can be defined for repre-
senting the LoS components in the Doppler power spectrum.
A Lorentzian line-shape function in linear values can be
expressed as
1 Pr
SLoS (f ) = f 2 πf
, (23)
1 + ( f ) 
where f is a constant to decide the exact Lorentzian shape,
and Pr is the received LoS power. The spreading parameter,
f , can be obtained from our experimental data when both
vehicles are stationary. This function is normalized such that
 ∞
SLoS (f )df = Pr . (24)
−∞
To find the power of the line-of-sight component, we use
the Friis formula,
λ 2
Pr = Pt Gt Gr ( ) D(1, dˆc ), (25)
4πd0
where the normalized distance between the transmitter and
receiver is 1.
The product Pt Gt Gr can be used as an adjustable parameter
to match one of the zero velocity spectrum plots, when both
vehicles are stationary. f can be obtained in a similar fashion.
For the position of the LoS component, we confirmed from
experimental spectra that the position of the observed LoS
components is given by the Doppler shift associated with the
relative velocity between the vehicles.
R EFERENCES
[1] L. Cheng, B. Henty, D. Stancil, F. Bai, and P. Mudalige, “Mobile
vehicle-to-vehicle narrow-band channel measurement and characteri-
zation of the 5.9 GHz dedicated short range communication (DSRC)
frequency band,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 1501–
1516, 2007.
[2] L. Cheng, B. Henty, R. Cooper, D. Stancil, and F. Bai, “Multi-path
propagation measurements for vehicular networks at 5.9 GHz,” in Proc.
IEEE Wireless Commun. Netw. Conf., 2008.
[3] J. Maurer, W. Sorgel, and W. Wiesbeck, “Ray-tracing for vehicle-to-
vehicle communications,” USRI Proc., 2005.
[4] L. Cheng, F. Bai, and D. Stancil, “A new geometrical channel model for
vehicle-to-vehicle communications,” in Proc. IEEE Antennas Propag.
Soc. Int. Symp., 2009.
This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
CHENG et al.: A ROADSIDE SCATTERING MODEL FOR THE VEHICLE-TO-VEHICLE COMMUNICATION CHANNEL
[5] Q. Chen, F. Schmidt-Eisenlohr, D. Jiang, M. Torrent-Moreno, L. Del-
grossi, and H. Hartenstein, “Overhaul of IEEE 802.11 modeling and
simulation in ns-2,” in Proc. 10th ACM Symp. Modeling, Analysis,
Simulation Wireless Mobile Syst., 2007, p. 168.
[6] J. Mittag, S. Papanastasiou, H. Hartenstein, and E.G. Ström, “Enabling
accurate cross-layer PHY/MAC/NET simulation studies of vehicular
communication networks,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 99, pp. 1311–1326, 2011.
[7] G. Judd and P. Steenkiste, “Using emulation to understand and improve
wireless networks and applications,” in Proc. 2nd USENIX Association
Conf. Symp. Netw. Syst. Design Implementation-Vol. 2, 2005, pp. 203–
216.
[8] J. Maurer, T. Fugen, T. Schafer, and W. Wiesbeck, “A new inter-vehicle
communications (ivc) channel model,” in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol.
Conf., 2004.
[9] J. Karedal, F. Tufvesson, N. Czink, A. Paier, C. Dumard, T. Zemen,
C. Mecklenbräuker, and A. Molisch, “A geometry-based stochastic
MIMO model for vehicle-to-vehicle communications,” IEEE Trans.
Wireless Commun., vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 3646–3657, 2009.
[10] N. Czink, F. Kaltenberger, Y. Zhou, L. Bernadó, T. Zemen, and X. Yin,
“Low-complexity geometry-based modeling of diffuse scattering,” in
Proc. IEEE 4th European Conf. Antennas Propag. (EuCAP), 2010, pp.
1–4.
[11] X. Wang, E. Anderson, P. Steenkiste, and F. Bai, “Improving the
accuracy of environment-specific vehicular channel modeling,” in Proc.
ACM WiNTECH Workshop, 2012.
[12] “Standard specification for telecommunications and information ex-
change between roadside and vehicle systems - 5GHz band, dedicated
short range communications (DSRC) medium access control (MAC) and
physical layer (PHY) specifications, ASTM E2213-03,” Sep. 2003.
[13] M. Sepulcre and J. Gozalvez, “On the importance of radio channel
modeling for the dimensioning of wireless vehicular communication
systems,” in Proc. 7th Int. Conf. ITS, 2007.
[14] C. F. Mecklenbrauker, A. F. Molisch, J. Karedal, F. Tufvesson, A. Paier,
L. Bernadó, T. Zemen, O. Klemp, and N. Czink, “Vehicular channel
characterization and its implications for wireless system design and
performance,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 99, no. 99, pp. 1189–1212, 2011.
[15] J. Maurer, T. Fugen, and W. Wiesbeck, “Narrow-band measurements
and analysis of the inter-vehicle transmission channel at 5.2 GHz,” in
Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf., 2002, vol. 3, pp. 1274–1278.
[16] I. Sen and D. Matolak, “Vehicle-vehicle channel models for the 5-GHz
band,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 235–245,
2008.
[17] G. Acosta-Marum, K. Tokuda, and M. Ingram, “Measured joint Doppler-
delay power profiles for vehicle-to-vehicle communications at 2.4 GHz,”
in Proc. IEEE GLOBECOM, 2004, vol. 6, pp. 3813–3817.
[18] G. Acosta-Marum and M. Ingram, “Model development for the wide-
band vehicle-to-vehicle 2.4 GHz channel,” in Proc. IEEE WCNC, 2006.
[19] G. Acosta-Marum and M. Ingram, “A BER-based partitioned model
for a 2.4GHz vehicle-to-vehicle expressway channel,” Wireless Pers.
Commun.: Int. J., vol. 37, pp. 421–443, 2006.
[20] G. Acosta-Marum, B. Walkenhorst, and R. Baxley, “An empirical
doubly-selective dual-polarization vehicular mimo channel model,” in
Proc. Int. Symp. Wireless Veh. Commun., 2010.
[21] G. Acosta-Marum and M. Ingram, “Six time-and frequency-selective
empirical channel models for vehicular wireless lans,” IEEE Veh.
Technol. Mag., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 4–11, 2007.
[22] G. Acosta-Marum and M. Ingram, “Doubly selective vehicle-to-vehicle
channel measurements and modeling at 5.9 GHz,” in Proc. Wireless
Pers. Multimedia Commun. Conf., Sep. 2006.
[23] A. Paier, J. Karedal, N. Czink, C. Dumard, T. Zemen, F. Tufvesson, A. F.
Molisch, and C. F. Mecklenbraucker, “Characterization of vehicle-to-
vehicle radio channels from measurements at 5.2 GHz,” Wireless Pers.
Commun., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 19–32, 2009.
[24] I. Tan, W. Tang, K. Laberteaux, and A. Bahai, “Measurement and
analysis of wireless channel impariments in DSRC vehicular communi-
cations,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun., 2008.
[25] M. Patzold, B. O. Hogstad, and N. Youssef, “Modeling, analysis, and
simulation of MIMO mobile-to-mobile fading channels,” IEEE Trans.
Wireless Commun., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 510–520, 2008.
[26] A. Zajic, G. Stuber, T. Pratt, and S. Nguyen, “Wideband mimo mobile-
to-mobile channels: Geometry based statistical modeling with experi-
mental verification,” IEEE Veh. Technol. Mag., 2009.
[27] X. Cheng, C. X. Wang, D. I. Laurenson, H. H. Chen, and A. V. Vasi-
lakos, “A generic geometrical-based MIMO mobile-to-mobile channel
model,” in Proc. Int. Wireless Commun. Mobile Comput. Conf., 2008,
pp. 1000–1005.
11
[28] R. B. Ertel and J. H. Reed, “Angle and time of arrival statistics for
circular and elliptical scattering models,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun.,
vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 1829–1840, 1999.
[29] P. Hoeher, “A statistical discrete-time model for the WSSUS multipath
channel,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 461–468, 1992.
[30] J. C. Liberti and T. S. Rappaport, “A geometrically based model for line-
of-sight multipath radio channels,” in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf.,
1996, vol. 2, pp. 844–848.
[31] R. Janaswamy, “Angle and time of arrival statistics for the Gaussian
scatter density model,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 1, no. 3,
pp. 488–497, 2002.
[32] M. Pätzold and B. O. Hogstad, “A space-time channel simulator for
MIMO channels based on the geometrical one-ring scattering model,”
Wireless Commun. Mobile Comput., vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 727–737, 2004.
[33] A. S. Akki and F. Haber, “A statistical model of mobile-to-mobile land
communication channel,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., 1986.
[34] C. Patel, G. Stuber, and T. Pratt, “Simulation of rayleigh-faded mobile-
to-mobile communication channels,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 53, pp.
1876–1884, 2005.
[35] J. D. Parsons, The Mobile Radio Propagation Channel, 2nd ed. John
Wiley and Sons, 2000.
[36] X. Zhao, J. Kivinen, P. Vainikainen, and K. Skog, “Propagation char-
acteristics for wideband outdoor mobile communications at 5.3 GHz,”
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 507–514, Apr. 2002.
[37] X. Zhao, J. Kivinen, P. Vainikainen, and K. Skog, “Characterization of
Doppler spectra for mobile communications at 5.3 GHz,” IEEE Trans.
Veh. Technol., vol. 52, pp. 14–23, 2003.
[38] L. Cheng, B. Henty, D. Stancil, and F. Bai, “Doppler component analysis
of the suburban vehicle-to-vehicle DSRC propagation channel at 5.9
GHz,” in Proc. IEEE Radio Wirelss Symp., 2008.
Lin Cheng (S’05-M’08) is an Assistant Professor
of engineering at Trinity College, CT, USA. He
received M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical and
computer engineering from Carnegie Mellon Uni-
versity. Dr. Cheng has held visiting positions at the
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Har-
vard University, Cambridge, MA, and the General
Motors Global Research Center, Warren, MI. His
main research area is wireless channel modeling for
challenging propagation environments, for example,
the propagation channel between high speed vehicles
in rapid changing environments. He is also interested in graph based methods
in brain connectivity and image processing. Dr. Cheng received the Best Paper
Award at the 24th IASTED Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing
and Systems.
Daniel D. Stancil (F’04) received the Ph.D. degree
from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, in 1981. From 1981 to 1986, he was
an Assistant Professor of electrical and computer
engineering with North Carolina State University,
Raleigh. In 1986, he joined the faculty of Carnegie
Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, as an Associate
Professor. From 1990 to 2009, he was a Professor
with Carnegie Mellon University, where he also
served as the Associate Department Head and the
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs with the Col-
lege of Engineering. He is currently the Alcoa Distinguished Professor and
the Head of the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, North
Carolina State University. His research interests include wireless communi-
cations, antennas, and applied optics. Dr. Stancil is a past-President of the
IEEE Magnetics Society.
Fan Bai is a senior researcher in the Electrical
and Control Integration Laboratory, General Motors
Corporation. He received a Ph.D. degree in elec-
trical engineering from the University of Southern
California in 2005. His research is focused on the
discovery of fundamental principles and the design
of protocols for VANETs, on which he has pub-
lished over 30 journal and conference papers. He re-
ceived the Charles L. McCuen Special Achievement
Award from GM for his research accomplishments
in VANETs.