You are on page 1of 8

822

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNASAND PROPAGATION, VOL. AP-32, NO. 8, AUGUST 1984

Propagation Factors Controlling Mean Field Strength on Urban Streets


Fumo m
G W ,
SENIOR MEMBER,

IEEE, SUSUMU YOSMDA, MEMBER, AND MASAHIRO TJMEHIRA

IEEE,

TSUTOMU T D U C H I ,

Abstract-Calculation of mean field strength for urban mobile radio has been made on a ray-theoretical basis assuming an ideal city structure with worm building heights. The result shows that building height, street width, add street orientation as well as mobile station antenna height are controlling propagation parameters in addition to the ordinary factors. The mijor theoretical characteristics agree approximately with experiment l data including conventional empirical predictions. T i suggests a way a hs of theoretically predicting mean field strength in an urban area.

I. INTRODUCTION

REDICTION OF mean signal strength for arbitrary propagation conditions is essential for designingmobile a radio system. Prediction for irregular terrain can be made using groundBUILDINGS wave propagationtheories,withstatisticalterrainfactorscombinedasnecessary.However,prediction inurban areasmust rely at present on a purely empirical method [ 1] . More precise prediction for urban areas is needed, particularly when the size of radio zones in a cellular mobile radio has to be Fig. 1. A multipatb propagation model. decreased [2]. For this purpose, it k ne.cessary to provide a clear theoreticalbasisforthepropagationfactorswhichdetermine some major propagation characteristics might be determined by mean field strength. considering ray-theoretical components. Studies on propagation structures in urban areas revealed that This propagationmodel is drawn in Fig. 1 assumingplane "ray-theoretical" waves play an importantrole,and suggested waves. The available power P(x) received by an isotropic antenna that major propagation characteristics might be controlled is given by by such principal waves [3]. This may lead to a possibility of predictingmeanfieldstrength by means of ray-theoreticalapproach, to the extent that ray components are dominant. This paper analyzes the controlling propagation factors based onthe geometrical optics assumingsimple a two-ray model. Comparison with experiment results in fajrly good agreement.

11. PRINCIPLE OF PREDICTION BASED ON GEOMETRICAL OPTICS

Propagation in urban areas shows complicated features due to various propagation modes caused by complicated radio environments. However, detailed analyses of multipath waves disclosed the following aspects as to the propagation structures on urban streets [3]. Therearea f i t e number of multipath waves arriving at a receiving point from discrete directions. Some of them are subject to simple geometrical optics, such as diffraction and/or reflectionbybuildings. In many cases stableprincipalcomponents exist, though the strengths may vary along a street. This suggest a plausible propagation model consisting of raytheoretical waves plus noway-theoretical waves that are interThesecondterm of (2), theintegrand of which is oscillatory preted as scattered waves from nearby buildings. If ray-theoretidue to interference of each two of multipath waves, tends to discal waves are dominant, as observed in the detailed experiments, with theperiods appearwhen E is sufficientlylargecompared of fluctuation. Then the first term remains, then so
Manuscript received June 9, 1983; revised December 5 , 1983. F. Ikegami, S. Yoshida, andT. Takeuchiare witb the Department of Electronics, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606, Japan. M. Umehira is with Yokosuka Electrical Communication Laboratory, Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Public Corporation, Yokosuka 238-03, Japan.

where E is field strength, 8 is phase, and h is wavelength. A mean power received by a vehicle moving over a distance I is given as follows:

where pi is a mean power of the ith multipath wave over a distance

0018-926X/84/0800-0822$01.00 0 1984 IEEE

IKEGhMI e t a l . : FIELD STRENGTH ON URBAN STREETS

823

1. Consequently, the mean signal strength is obtained by the root mean square of the field strengths of component waves.

Here inthe above calculation,attention should be paid in choosingan averaging distance 1. As spatial fading in general contains fluctuations of various spatial periods, mean signal strength is dependenton a sample length 1 over which signal strength is averaged. So, a fading sample length should be chosen according to the requirement of the analysis Fading onurbanstreets is considered to be composed of long-term short-term and fading. It is generally understood thattheformer is caused by variation of building diffraction loss (shadowing) andthelatter byinterference of multipath waves.As the present study concerns long-term fading, sample length must be taken sufficiently long compared with short-term fading periods and small compared with the sizes of buildings. In t h i s paper, which treats radio frequencies above VHF, sample length will be taken as about 10 50 m considering the wavelengthsand building sizes together with the requirementsof the analysis. In the model of Fig. 1, the power of each wave is assumed constant over an averaging section. Some of the arrivingwaves, scattered waves forinstance,may have multipathstructure in themselves producing Rayleigh-distributed short-term fading, but it is appropriate t o assume that the mean power is almost constant over the section. As the mean received signal power is given by the power sum of the arrivingwaves, a small number of strong waves mainly contributed to the mean power; then the error caused by neglecting weak waves is relatively small. Letthetotal powersums of the accounted and the disregarded waves be CP, and ZPd, respectively, then the erroris given by

Fig. 2. Ideal city structure and geometricaloptical rays.

Plan

= 10 log (1 6) [dB] ZPa where 6 = ZPd/ZPa. For example, if the disregarded power is less than the accounted, the error within 3 dB. is According to the referenced detailed experiments [3], directdiffracted and single-reflected waves are observed to be the principal waves in manycases, because multiple diffraction andreflection result in large attenuation. l i Considering the above, the following assumption wbe taken for an ideal city structure as shown in Fig. 2, consisting of regularly laid-out blocks with uniform building height. A directdiffracted ray (@ in Fig. 2) and a ray single-reflected by a building across the street (0 in Fig. 2) comprise the principal dominant components that exist at almost all receiving points. Other raytheoretical waves and nonray-theoretical waves depicted by dotted lines are all neglected by assuming that the power sum ofthose waves is small comparedwith the power sum of the above two principalrays. Thefieldstrengthsofthe two principalrayscanbe easily calculated if propagation path profdes for both rays e available, x with mean field strength evaluated by (4).

A = 10 log

XPa

+p

I I
I

Cross section
antenna
W

I---W----I

Fig. 3. Geometry of two principal rays.

incident wave and a street, denoted by a, will for convenience be referred to as street angle (0 < CP < 90). Field strengths of the two rays E , and E2 are given by the following approximate equations with assumptions as described in the Appendix.

E , = (0.225/fi)E0fi/(H

-h r ) m

(6)
, m

III. APPROXIMATE EQUATION OF MEAN FIELD STRENGTH

E2 = (0.225/4)E04/X(2W - w)/L,(H - h

(7)

which determine where Eo is free space field strength, X is wavelength, and L , is Fig. 3 shows a geometry of two principal rays an amplituderatio ofincidentand mean field strength on a street based on the assumptions described reflectionlossdefinedby in the previous chapter. In thisfigure,an angle between the reflected waves.

824

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. AP-32, NO. 8 , AUGUST 1984

H= 2 O m h= 2.5m , W= 30m

f = 395.425MHz
@ = 900

L =
,4dB

t
5

-.

. E
2 510 2 0

15 w (m)

30

Fig. 4. Examples of relative field strength variation across a street.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE M I 0 WAVE SOURCES UTILIZED IN THE TESTS

TABLE I -

Mean field strength is obtained as

E = d.qTq
. *

In thefollowing sections, mean field strength be tentatively will calculated with a constant reflection loss L, = 6 dB, considering that L, does not directly affect each parameter.

IV. COMPARISON WITH FIELD EXPERIMENTS


A. Outline of Experiments
Examples of relative field strength variation across a street are calculated shown as in Fig. 4 with L , [dB] as aparameter. Reflection loss, being largely dependent on radio and building 10 dB on average parameters, takes valuesof the order of 4 according to the experiments of VHF and UHF bands [4]. Since mean field strength almost is constant Fig. 4 indicates that acros astreetforprobable values of L,, mean field strength on astreetmayapproximately be representedby thatatthe center of a street, given by

In order to compare the theoretical predictions described in Section 111 with experiment, measurements of mean field strength were made in the campus of Kyoto University and on representative streets in Kyoto City in the 200, 400, and 600 MHz bands, radiated from different sites, as shown in Table I and Fig. 5. On the universitycampus,spatialdistributionofmeanfield strength were measured along and across a street, and with height above the ground.

E + (0.225/2)

l; r

1 + 7E o a I ( f f -

B, Along a Street
(w = W / 2 ) .
Fig. 6 shows a comparison of the measured (running average of +5 m) and calculated (every 2 m j mean field strengths along course A on the universitycampus. Thecalculation, based in above equaprinciple on the above theory, was made in practice by a computer aided method applicable to the actual building conditions [5]. Satisfactory agreement is seen between calculation and experiment as a whole.
(9)

Replacing the wavelength by radio frequency, the tion is rewritten in dB as

- 20 log (ff - h,) - 10 log (sin

a) - 10 logf

[dB], (10)

C Across a Sh-eet

As shown in Fig. 7, ameasuredfieldstrengthacrosscourse where W, , h, are in meters andfis MHz. H in It is noted that mean field strength at the center of a street A (thin line) displays interference of the diffracted and reflected waves, togetherwiththerandomscattered waves. Thedotted isapproximatelydescribedasafunction of theindependent propagation parameters, W , H , h,, a, andf, the effect of each is curve shows a running average of +1 m around a receiving point, andiscomparedwiththetheoretical curve (thickline)with quite simply understood regardless of reflection loss.

IKEGAMI er al.: FIELD STRENGTH ON URBAN STREETS

825

Fig. 5. Map of test area in Kyoto City.

826

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. AP-32, NO. 8, AUGUST 1984

Courae A

400 lulz
I I

1 l2 1

thsorstical
mmured

wursc A
400 MHz

100

rn
Diatance
(mi

XKI

Fig. 6. Comparison of measured and calculated m a field strength on course en A.

...".
J

:-wed : :

COUESE A

60

m g average i n

400

Hliz

theoretical

Fig. 8. Height-gain characteristics.


f = 600

Mz H

zol
10

meaaured

10

ll

12

13

14

15
I 1 n

16

17

18

Distance from the building

Fig. 7. Variation of field strength across a street.

appreciable agreement. As stated in Section 111, mean field strength is almost constantacross a street.

D.Height Gain
A measuring antenna was raised up to about 10 m above the ground at representative points on the campus. An example is shown in Fig. 8. The running average (kl m) denoted by a dotted line shows atendency similar tothe theoretical curve (thick line).
0 t t

*
1 . v . . , . r

30

60

90

E. Difference at BothSides of a Street

Mean field stxength is almost constant across a street as mentioned above. Confiiation was made in urban parts of Kyoto City, comparing the values at both sides streets, Measurements E Dependence on Street Width of were made along outer car lanes nearest to both sidewalks. The It is commonly experienced that mean field strength is high receiving points approximately correspond to w = W/4and 3 W/4, on a wide street. In Fig. 11, the mean values and standard deviarespectively, inFig. 3. tions of the measuredmeanfieldstrengthsnormalizedby the Fig. 9 showsthedifference of meanfieldstrengths(50-m free-space value are plotted against street width classified every mean) at both sides of a street versus street angle. No significant 10 m, referred to the mean value of W < 10 m. Though the measdifference is seen in average, except that the plots tend to scat- ured values are widely scattered, the mean values agree with the ter at small street angles. theoretical curve. w = W/4 and 3W/4 Differencesofmeanfieldstrengthsat are calculated as shown in Fig. 10, for various combinations of G. Dependence on Street Angle It is also acommonexperiencethatmeanfieldstrength is street width (10 50 m every 10 m) and building height (10 high when incident wave direction is nearly parallel t o a street 50 rn every 10 m). Althoughthedifference is dependenton street width and building height, the whole tendency is similar [l], [6]. Fig. 12 shows the measured relative mean field strength normalized by the free-space value versus street angle, compared to the measured.

Street angle (deg) Fig. 9. Difference of mean field strengths atboth sides of a street versus street. angle.

JKEGAMI e t al.: FIELD STRENGTH ON URBAN STREETS


f = 600 )3Hr elevation angle : 6(deg) H 101.50m (every 1Om) W = 101.5Om (every 10m)

827
withthetheoretical curve. The increasing tendencywithdecreasing street angle appears to show aBeement.

V. COMPARISON WITH THE CONVENTIONAL EMPIRICAL


METHOD

H-50m, W-lOm

A Height Gain The height-gain curvesgiven in the empirical method [ I ] is compared in Fig. 13 withthetheoretical curves calculatedfor H = 12,15, and 20 m. As seen in thefigure, dense urbanapproximatelycorresponds to H = 20 m: and moderate urban t o H = 12 m. The height-gain dependence on city size in the empirical method is physically interpreted as the variation ofdiffraction loss with mean building height.
90

30
Street angle

60
(deg)

B. Dependence on Propagation Distance

Fig. 10. Theoretical differencesof mean field strengthsat o = W/4 and 3 W/ 4 (E( W/4) - E(3 W/4)).

20

f = 4 0 0 MHz
: m e a s u r e d (mean f standard deviation)

: theoretical

Fig. 14 shows the mean and the variation range of mean field strengths versus propagation distance measured a t 400 MHz in Kyoto City, in comparison with the predicted curve. The attenuation rate of the empirical curve for suburbanareas is well coincidentwith that of the measured values (approximated by d-le4), while that of thetheoretical curves (d-l) for various street widths deviates at longer distances. The disagreement of the theoretical curve seems to be due to the assumption uniform of building height. For complicated building heightdistributions,moreattenuationmaybe apt to occur at longer distances because of increased probability of multi-edge diffraction.

E
4

% o a

1
20

S tw( m e t e r ) ri d t h eet

C Dependence on Radio Frequency Comparison of radio frequency dependence between the theoreticaland empirical methods isshown in Fig. 15, which gives a relative value referred to 200 MHz. Theattenuation rate of the theory (-10 dB/decade) differs from the empirical prediction of -6.16 dB/decade. However, the discrepancy is not more than 2 3 dB a t frequencies below 1 GHz.

Fig. 11. Mean field strength versus streetwidth.

VI. DISCUSSION
It has been found that an approximate theory can describe almost all major characteristics of mean field strength on urban street. This means that variations in mean field strength can be interpreted as those, resulting fromdiffraction loss, as usually termed by shadowing. In a sense, the present study has confirmed thevalidity of this concept. However, it is surprising that a theory based on the assumptionsof a simple two-raymodelanduniform building height agrees with experiments performed in actual, complicated environments. What this means will be considered in the following. At first, it should be recalled that disregard of wave power sum less than the accounted power sum (6 G 1) produces a relatively small error (G3 dB). This is in contrast with multipath fading, in which disregard of a comparable wave componentmay result in a gross mistreatment of fading. Mean field strength is insensitive to neglect of weak wave components on account of the power sum law. The results of the analysis seem t o indicate that the typical two-ray configuration can represent the principal multipath. Next, consider theassumption of uniform building height. The effect of a variety of building heights in actual city conditions wouldbe smoothedout in average forsufficiently large amount of data. The clear results obtained arebecause all param-

r -

: theoretical

400 MHz m e a s u r e d
(mean 5 standard deviation) (mean

2 standard deviation)

w a

L1

Y ..

30

. 60

I
90

STREET ANGLE ( d e g ) Fig. 12. Mean field strength versus street angle.

828

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. AP-32, NO. 8, AUGUST 1984

10 -

Frequency (GHz)

98E P .rl
P)

7-

-10.1
theoretical
-4 +I
rl

2 6'

; 5E

; 4-32-

reference antenna height : 4 m

empirical prediction

am

...... . dense urbanMHz) . (above 400


-___. urban dense
'

;i
-20

--- : e m p i r i c a l

theoretical

Fig. 15. M a field strengthversusradiofrequency. en

-. - . ( 4 0 0 MHz) urban .moderate


I
I

(below 400 MHz)

-20

-10

10

20

tion in the validity of the present method. Being based on the assumption that ray-theoretical components are dominant, this method would be no more valid when ray-theoretical waves are largely attenuated by deepdiffraction, whichmaytakeplace at higherfrequenciesandforhigher buildings andforlower cell antennaheights.Thoughtheexactlimitingconditionsare not yet very clear, further exploration of the limits is beyond the scope ofthis study.

H e i g h tg a i nr e f e r r e d h e i g h t of 4 m (dB)

to antenna

VII. CONCLUSION
A theoretical calculation limited to .diffractedandreflected fields can approximately describe themajorcharacteristicsof meanfieldstrengthsonurbanstreets,withcontrolling factors of building height, mobile station antenna height, street width and street angle in addition to the ordinary propagation parameters.The theory also gives the height-gain curves in the conventional empirical method a clear physical meaning. The results of the study suggest a way to predict mean field strength on a theoretical basis for arbitrary radio and city structure conditions. A prototype computer-aided prediction system based on this principle has developed, and appears show the been to feasibility of this method [ 51

Fig. 13. Theoretical height gain compared with the empirical prediction [l].

loo

400 MHz

H= 8m

-------20

APPENDIX
: theoretical
: empirical

Reduction of (6) and (7)


4

2.

7 8 9 1 0
(kid

20

In Fig. 3, thefollowingareassumedforsimplicityandare appropriate for ordinary urban mobile radio.


1) The roof of a diffracting building is well within the line
of sight of a transmitting antenna.

DISTAUCE PBoI( TDAHSUTTBR

Fig. 14. Mean field strengthversuspropagation distance.

2) A diffracting building is substituted by an infinitely long


knife edge transverse to the wave propagation direction. eters are mutually independent of each other as givenby (10). 3) The ground reflection is ignored. I t shouldbenoted,however,that (10) doesnot give theabsolute value fortheactualnonunifom building heights.The The path profileis then transformed to Fig. 16. absolute value should be calculated by taking multiedge diffracA diffraction field behind a knife edge isgiven by the wellwaves into account. tion loss and/or more than two mdtipath known Fresnel's equation as approximated by What is most important in the results of the present study E 0.225Eo/~ 01) is that the mean field strength is approximately determined by diffracted and reflected fields subject only to geometrical optics. for u> 1 with an error less than 1 dB [7] . This means that a mean field strength could be predicted theoretiThe Fresnel's parameter u takesthefollowingapproximate cally if the propagation loss is calculated for each principal rayvalues,ifOsOandd, Sww,2W-w,andH. theoretical wave. u1 6, - hr)d-, for diffracted wave (12) The above discussion naturally implies that there is a limita-

'

a(~

IKEGAMI e t ~ l . FIELD STRENGTH ON URBAN STREETS :


Transmitter

829
submarine cable systems, satellite communication systems, and mobile communication systems as the Director of the Transmission Svstem Development Division at Yokosuka ECL. Since 1975, he has been a Professor at Kyoto University, Faculty of Engineering, Kyoto, Japan. Dr. Ikegami is a member of the Institute of Electronics and Communication Engineers of Japan and the Institute of Television Engineers of Japan.

l--( --t

v2 =

a ( h,)Jsin ~
-

(a/x(2W - w),

for reflected wave.


(13)

Then E , and E2 are given by

E1

+ 0.225E,/v,,

E2

k 0.225E,/vzL,

resulting in (6) and (7).

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors are indebted to the many students who worked on this study during their graduate courses.

Susumu Yoshida(78) was born in Hyogo Prefecture, Japan, on November 26, 1948. He received the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan, in 1971, 1973, and 1978, respectively. In 1973 he joined the Faculty of Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan, as a Research Associate. Since 1979 he has been an Associate Professor at Kyoto University. From 1971 to 1976, he was engaged in the research of automata theory from a stochastic point of view, transmission code theory, and computer networks. Since then he has been engaged in the research of mobile communication systems. Dr. Yoshida is a member of the Institute of Electronics and Communication Engineers of Japan and the Information Processing Society of Japan.

REFERENCES
[l] Y. Okumura, E. Ohmori, T. Kawano, andK. Fukuda, Field strength and its variability in VHF and UHF land mobile service, Rev. Elec. Comm. Lab., vol. 16, pp. 825-873, Sept.-Oct. 1968. [2] V.H. MacDonald, The cellularconcept, BeliSyst. Tech. J., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 15-42, Jan. 1979. [3] F. Ikegami and S. Yoshida, Analysis of multipath propagation structure in urban mobile radio environments, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagut., V O ~ .AP-28, 110. 4, pp. 531-537, July 1980. [4] S . Mitobe and S. Ito, Measurement of VHF reflection from precast concrete walls, NHK Tech. Rep., pp. 103-109, Mar. 1974 (in Japanese). [5] F. Jkegami and S . Yoshida, Feasibility of predicting mean field strength for urban mobile radio by aid of building data bases, in Conf. Rec. ZEEE Znt. Conf. Commun., (ICCSS), paper A2.6, Boston, MA, June 20-23, 1983, pp. 68-76. [6] W. C. Jakes, Jr. Ed., Microwave Mobile Communicutions. New York: Wiley, 1974, sec. 2.2.7. [7] C. R. Burrows and S. S. Attwood, RudioWavePropagation. New York: Academic, 1949, p. 464.

Tsutoma Takeuchi was born in Kyoto City, Japan, on November 13th, 1953. He received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in electronics engineering from Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan, in 1976 and 1978, respec1978 to 1982, he was worked for the Communication Laboratory, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Public Corporation, Tokyo, Japan, where he worked on the development of TDMA equipments for satellite communications system. In 1982, he joined the Faculty of Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. Since 1982, he has been engaged in the research on mobile communication systems. Mr. Takeuchi is a member of the Institute of Electronics and Communication Engineers of Japan.