Upload
merryl-woods
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
July 2004
Robert Poor, Ember CorporationSlide 1
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0389r1
Submission
Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)
Submission Title: [PHY Comparison Checklist]Date Submitted: [15 July 2004]Source: [Robert Poor] Company [Ember Corporation]Address [313 Congress Street, Boston MA 02210]Voice:[+1 617 951-0200], FAX: [+1 617 951-0999], E-Mail:[rpoor @ ieee . org]
Re: []
Abstract: [This document presents a set of common criteria for comparing sub-GHz PHY designs submitted in response to the TG4b call for proposals 15-04-0239-xx-004b.]
Purpose: [This document is intended to encourage discussion within the IEEE 802.15.4 TG4b task group.]
Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15.
July 2004
Robert Poor, Ember CorporationSlide 2
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0389r1
Submission
PHY Comparison Checklist
Robert Poor <rpoor @ ieee . org>
July 2004
Robert Poor, Ember CorporationSlide 3
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0389r1
Submission
Motivation
• This document presents a checklist of metrics for comparing sub-GHz PHY designs submitted in response to the TG4b Call For Proposals document 15-04-0239.
• This checklist is intended as a tool to aid in the comparison of various PHY proposals and to promote discussion.
July 2004
Robert Poor, Ember CorporationSlide 4
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0389r1
Submission
Choice of Metrics
• The comparison metrics presented here are intended to be:– Relevant: appropriate to the goals of the
15.4 PAR.– Malleable: they will evolve as a result of
discussion.– Non-binding: they are presented to
accelerate discussion, not to guarantee design goals.
July 2004
Robert Poor, Ember CorporationSlide 5
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0389r1
Submission
On using this checklist
• You are encouraged to characterize more than one design. For example, you might profile a baseline system alongside a lower-cost design that highlights particular strengths of your proposal.
• Designs should account for all components relevant to the PHY, from the antenna port to a “bit pipe” to and from the MAC. It should include frequency synthesizers, etc.
July 2004
Robert Poor, Ember CorporationSlide 6
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0389r1
Submission
Transmit Characteristics
Transmit Power
Bits Per Second
Transmitted Spectrum
July 2004
Robert Poor, Ember CorporationSlide 7
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0389r1
Submission
Receiver Characteristics
Sensitivity (10-2 PER, 20 byte PSDU) at the detector
PER vs. Eb/N0[AWGN]
PER vs. Eb/N0[in-band interferer calculated according to ETSI methods]
Multipath Performance
July 2004
Robert Poor, Ember CorporationSlide 8
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0389r1
Submission
Power Requirements
Power consumption during Tx
Power consumption during Rx
Other power modes (e.g. idle, PLL running)
July 2004
Robert Poor, Ember CorporationSlide 9
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0389r1
Submission
Chip Cost
Area of analog circuitry (mm2)
Gate count of digital circuitry
Manufacturing Process (e.g. CMOS)
# of external components
Cost of external components
July 2004
Robert Poor, Ember CorporationSlide 10
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0389r1
Submission
External Properties
What are the IP or licensing encumbrances?
Does the design conform to currently allocated spectrum?
Does it support backwards compatibility?
Yes.
Other…