06.

April 2006

UMTS 2 carrier Deployment

At Same Freq. Band

www.huawei.com
www.huawei
.com

HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.

Drive for the introduction of multi-carriers
What are the drives of multi-carrier deployment?

• Address traffic growth effectively and efficiently Mobile

Broadband
(especially for hot spots). Internet and
high quality
• Enable successful launch of new services (e.g.
mobile data
HSPA, CMB, etc). services on
HSPA

What is a successful multi-carrier deployment strategy?

A successful deployment strategy …
• … minimizes the impact on current network (for carrier expansion projects).
• … meets the technical requirements in terms of KPIs, capacity enhancement,
low deployment risk and complexity.
• … respects the Operator’s Business Plan that aims to achieve lowest
CAPEX + OPEX.

Page 2
 Deployment Strategy of 2 Carrier Scenario
F2 F2

F1 F1 F1

Strategy a: Strategy b:
Randomly Camping Prefer to camp on one carrier
F2 R99+HSPA R99+HSPA
F2
HSPA+R99 HSPA+R99

F1 R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA

F1

Page 3
 2 Carriers scenario
Strategy a: Randomly Camping Randomly camping

Cell reselection

F2 R99+HSPA R99+HSPA
R99+HSPA
UE make cell reselection
between F1 and F2

F1 R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA

Service bearer  Camping Strategy

 Camp on F1 an F2 randomly
strategy  UE makes cell selection and
– F1 support R99+HSPA
reselection between F1 and F2
– F2 support R99+HSPA
– Service priority are same for both cells
carriers

Page 4
 2 Carriers scenario
Mobility of Strategy a Randomly camping

Intra-freq. SHO bi-directional

Inter-freq. HHO uni-directional

F2 R99+HSPA R99+HSPA Blind handover bi-directional

R99+HSPA

F1 R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA

 Allow intra-frequency handover based on coverage both for F1 & F2;

 Allow handover based on coverage only from F2 to F1 at the coverage edge of F2, no
handover based on coverage from F1 to F2;
 Configure blind handover neighboring relationships between F1 and F2 cells within the
same coverage range, allow bi-directional blind handover between F1 and F2 in the
area both F1 and F2 covered.
 Configure GSM as neighboring cell both for F1 and F2, only configure F1 as
neighboring cell for GSM.

Page 5
 2 Carriers scenario

Loading Balancing for Strategy a Randomly camping

DRD based on Loading balancing

F2 R99+HSPA R99+HSPA
R99+HSPA
Inter-freq. Handover based on LDR

F1 R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA

Loading Balancing
Strategy Challenges Solutions

 LDR is activated for both F1 and F2 carriers. LDR

Decrease the DRD request times
action are:
How to improve the between two carrier cells are main
UL: BE reduction  Inter-freq. HHO CS inter-RAT
solution:
handover service success rate of
DL: Codes reshuffling BE reduction Inter-freq.
DRD between F1&F2 cells a. Set 5% as the offset of HSPA
HHO  CS inter-RAT handover
 Bi-directional DRD based on loading balancing and improve user users between two carrier
(HSDPA users Number) between F1 and F2 is cells (or higher), thus DRD will
experiences? happen only if difference of
activated.
 To improve the user experiences of R99, DRD for HSDPA users between two
R99 services are not recommended. carrier cells are larger than
 Users will try F1 if rejected by F2, users will try F2 if 10%;
rejected by F1. b. Target network for DRD,
Ec/No>-12dB;

Page 6
 2 Carriers scenario

Summary for Strategy a Randomly camping

 Service bearer strategy

F2 R99+HSPA R99+HSPA
 F1 support R99+HSPA
 F2 support R99+HSPA

R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA

 Service priority are same
F1
on both carriers

Advantages of this Strategy： Disadvantages of this Strategy：

 Good user experiences of HSPA,  Ping-pong cell reselection may exist

access delay is small, HSPA service between F1 and F2 cells if cell
setup success rate is high. selection and reselection parameters
are not set appropriately.
 Big capacity space for HSPA services.
 Voice user experiences is not as good
as strategy b.

Page 7
 2 Carriers scenario

Strategy b: Prefer to Camp on F1 Prefer to camp on F1

Cell reselection

DRD based on Service

F2 HSPA+R99 HSPA+R99 HSPA+R99

UE back to F1 after
finishing service on F2 by
cell reselection

F1
R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA

 Service bearer strategy  Camping and Access Strategy

– F1 support R99+HSPA, mainly
for R99
– F2 support R99+HSPA, HSPA
service is prior
 Force UE to camp on F1 only, F2 is barred, or configure cell
reselection parameters to make F1 as the first priority to camp
on.
 Accept R99 service request on F1, DRD HSPA service to F2.
 Close DRD for multi-RAB(R99+HSPA) services to improve the
user experiences.
 All the services will access on F1 in the area with F1 coverage
only.

Page 8
 2 Carriers scenario

Mobility of Strategy b Prefer to camp on F1

Intra-freq. SHO

Inter-freq. HHO uni-directional

Blind handover bi-directional

F2 HSPA+R99 HSPA+R99 HSPA+R99

F1
R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA

 Allow intra-frequency handover based on coverage both for F1 & F2;

 Allow inter-freq HHO based on coverage only from F2 to F1 at the coverage edge of F2, no
handover based on coverage from F1 to F2;
 Configure blind handover neighboring relationships between F1 and F2 cells within same
coverage range, allow bi-directional blind handover between F1 and F2 within the area both
F1&F2 covered.
 Configure GSM as neighboring cell both for F1 and F2, only configure F1 as neighboring cell for
GSM.

Page 9
 2 Carriers scenario
Loading Balancing for Strategy b Prefer to camp on F1

DRD based on
service

F2 HSPA+R99 HSPA+R99 HSPA+R99 Inter-freq. Handover

based on LDR

F1
R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA

Loading Balancing Strategy Challenges Solutions

 DRD based on service will split HSPA

users and R99 users on F2 and F1 Ping-pong handover is the main
carrier. How to guarantee the problem here, ways to solve it:
 LDR activated for F1 and F2 carriers， user experiences in inter-
actions of LDR are freq. handover triggered a. Set 20% as the inter-freq. HHO
UL: BE service reduction inter freq. loading margin to avoid
by LDR?
HHO CS Inter-RAT Handover the ping-pong handover.
DL: Codes re-shuffling BE reduction
inter freq. HHO CS Inter-RAT b. Set 200Kbps as the maximum
Handover throughput of users trying inter-
 Users with R99 service failured on F1 will This solution is freq.
try F2; suitable for all HHO to avoid the big loading
inter-freq. HHO fluctuate in the target cells.
triggered by
LDR.

Page 10
 2 Carriers scenario

Strategy b Summary Prefer to camp on F1

F2 HSPA+R99 HSPA+R99  Service bearer strategy

 R99 prior on F1;
 HSPA prior on F2;
R99+HSPA R99+HSPA R99+HSPA
F1

Advantages of this Strategy： Disadvantages of this Strategy：

 Development of HSPA service wouldn’t
have any impact on R99 services;
 No ping-pong cell reselection risk
between F1 and F2 cells;
 DRD are needed for the HSPA service
setup, HSPA RAB setup success rate is
lower than strategy a. Will have negative
impact on Call drop rate.
 Normally R99 and H have the different
busy hour, so frequency resources are not
fully used in most of the time.

Strategy a is more
recommended compare
to strategy b!

Page 11
 Trial Confirmation
• Schedule: Proposed on 21 Feb
• Location: Proposed in Simatupang
• Test Case:
– 1
• Performance Monitor
06.April 2006

Thank You
www.huawei.com

www.huawei
.com

HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.