Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 1
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
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: [In-band Interference Properties of MB-OFDM]Date Submitted: [9 Sept, 2004]Source: [Charles Razzell] Company [Philips]Address [1109, McKay Drive, San Jose, CA 95131, USA]Voice:[+1 408 474 7243], FAX: [+1 408 474 5343], E-Mail:[[email protected]]
Re: [Extension of previous APD analysis in 802.15-04/326r0 and address points raised in 315r0 ]
Abstract: [Presents in-band interference properties of MB-OFDM as revealed by statistical properties (APDs) and by impact to BER curves for a QPSK transmission system]
Purpose: [To correct potential misapprehensions concerning the interference impact of MB-OFDM.]
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.
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 2
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
APD Plots and their Implications for MB-OFDM
Part 1
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 3
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Amplitude Probability Distributions
• APD methodology is favored by the NTIA in assessing interference impact of UWB waveforms
• For non-Gaussian interference, APD plots provide helpful insight into potential impact on victim receivers.
• For full impact assessment, knowledge of the victim system’s modulation scheme and FEC performance is needed
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 4
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
-102
-101
-100
-10-1
-10-2
-10-3
-10-4
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
ln(P(A>Ordinate))
A (
dB
)
Example APD plot (for Rayleigh Distribution)
Amplitude (A) in dB is plotted as the Ordinate
1-CDF(A) is plotted as the Abscissa
Plotting the natural log of the probabilities on a log scale provides scaling similar to Rayleigh graph paper.P(A>10dB) = exp(-10) = 4.54x10-5 ; P(A>-30dB) = exp(-0.001) =
0.999
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 5
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
APD plots for continuous OFDM signals as number of QPSK sub-carriers is varied
As the number of sub-carriers used increases, the approximation to the Rayleigh APD plot improves. This can be expected due to the Central Limit Theorem.-10
1-10
0-10
-1-10
-2-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
ln(P(A>Ord.))
Am
plit
ud
e [d
B]
4 subcarriers8 sub-carriers16-subcarriers32-subcarriersideal AWGN
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 6
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
APD plots for continuous OFDM with 128 sub-carriers as receiver bandwidth is varied
Using receiver filters of increasing bandwidths yields a similar result: approximation to Rayleigh APD is good for b/w20MHz
-101
-100
-10-1
-10-2
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
ln(P(A>ordinate))
Am
pli
tud
e (
dB
)
bw=2MHzbw=4MHzbw=5MHzbw=10MHzbw=20MHzbw=50MHz
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 7
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Analytic Expression for APD of OFDM waveforms
)2exp()()(
0)2(exp1
)2(exp
0)2(exp
22
22
22
0 2
222
rrCCDFrAPD
r,σr
duσuu
CDF(r)
r,σrσ
rPDF(r)
r
We have seen that for measurement bandwidths of 20MHz, the APD of OFDM closely approximates that of a Rayleigh distribution. This can be expected because the in-phase and quadrature components will both tend towards a Gaussian distribution due to the central limit theorem.
Assuming this approximation to be perfect, we can write a closed form expression for the APD of OFDM
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 8
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
obtain we,12power unit tonormalize weIf 2
,)exp(111
)(
:so ,2 , offactor cycleduty a introduce weNow
2
2
drdd
drCDF
dd
)ln(logagainst plotted is when line,staight
sticcharacteri theexplains which 10)ln(
obtain wesides,both of log natural the take weIf
10
10/2
CCDFA
rCCDF
dB
AdB
)exp( )( 2rrAPD
)exp(1
1)( 2 drd
CDFrAPD
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 9
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Analytically Derived APD Plot for MB-OFDM
% APD plots
d = 3*165/128; % duty cycle
x=linspace(-20,15);
rsq=10.^(x/10);
apd3=-rsq/d - log(d);
apd=-rsq;
semilogx(apd3,x,apd,x)
xlabel('ln(P(A>ordinate))')
ylabel('Amplitude [dB]')
legend('MB-OFDM','cont. OFDM')
axis([-10 -0.01 -20 15])
grid
-101
-100
-10-1
-10-2
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
ln(P(A>ordinate))
Am
pli
tud
e [
dB
]
MB-OFDMcont. OFDM
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 10
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Simulated APD plots for continuous and 3-band OFDM, using 128 sub-carriers
Signal/interferer is normalized to unit power 0dBW.
Probability of noise amplitude exceeding signal amplitude is given by abscissa value at the intersection of a horizontal SIR line with the APD curve.
-101
-100
-10-1
-10-2
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
ln(P(A>ordinate))
Am
pli
tud
e [
dB
]
MB-OFDMcont. OFDM
1.8%
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 11
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Simulated APD for MB-OFDM as a function of victim Rx bandwidth
-101
-100
-10-1
-10-2
-10-3
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
Am
pli
tud
e [
dB
]
ln(P(A>ordinate))
bw=2MHzbw=4MHzbw=5MHzbw=10MHzbw=20MHzbw=50MHz
Victim Rx bandwidth has a significant impact on the APD plots: generally speaking, lower receiver bandwidths “experience” a more benign version of the APD.
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 12
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
-101
-100
-10-1
-10-2
-10-3
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
Am
pli
tud
e [
dB
]
ln(P(A>ordinate))
bw=2MHzbw=4MHzbw=5MHzbw=10MHzbw=20MHzbw=50MHz
Simulated APD for 1MHz PRF Impulse as a function of victim Rx bandwidth
APD plots for this 1MHz PRF impulse show significantly higher peaks for large receiver bandwidths {20,50MHz}.
At lower received bandwidths, APD plots are strikingly similar to those for MB-OFDM
(Flipping between this and the previous slide may help illustrate this point.)
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 13
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
100
101
102
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
Victim Rx bandwidth
Pe
ak
po
we
r (9
9.5
%-t
ile
) [d
Bm
]
impulseofdm1ofdm3peak-limit
Peak Received Powers As a Function of Receiver Bandwidth
The impulse radio’s peak power consistently scales with 20log(BW).
The continuous OFDM signal (ofdm1) has a peak power that scales with 10log(BW)
The 3-band OFDM signal looks like a “hybrid” signal. For lower Rx bandwidths its peak power tracks with the 1MHz impulse radio, but at 10MHz and above the slope reverts to that of pure OFDM.
MB-OFDM
advantage
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 14
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
-101
-100
-10-1
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
ln(P(A>ordinate))
Am
pli
tud
e (
dB
)
cont. OFDMMB-OFDMImpulse PRF=1MHzImpulse PRF=3.3MHzImpulse PRF=10MHz
Simulated APD Curves for OFDM and Impulse Radios in 50MHz bandwidth
10MHz PRF impulse radio has nearly identical APD to 1/3 duty cycle OFDM in region of interest.
3MHz and 1MHz PRF radios have significantly higher SIR ratios corresponding to the 1.8% P(A>ord.) line than the 3-band OFDM system.
All these impulse radios would be permitted under current part 15f legislation.
1.8%
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 15
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Single dominant source of interference may not reflect real scenarios…
• All the above APD analysis has assumed that the dominant source of interference is a single instance of the considered waveform
• For this to be true: – A single interferer must be very close to the victim receiver
such that it can overwhelm:• The thermal noise of the receiver
• The additive combination of other uncoordinated UWB and other interferers
• Examples of aggregate (Noise + Interference) APDs follow
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 16
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
APD plots of 1/3 duty cycle OFDM combined with thermal receiver noise
-101
-100
-10-1
-10-2
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15APD plots of 1/3 duty cycle OFDM combined with thermal noise
ln(P(A>ord))
A [
dB
]
I/N = +4dBI/N = –3.5dBI/N = –9.5dB
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 17
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
APD Conclusions• Using the NTIA APD methodology for the worst-case
scenario of a single dominant interferer shows:– That the required SIRs for low PRF impulse radios are greater
than those needed for the 3-band OFDM waveform for cases where the victim receiver band exceeds the impulse PRF by a factor of 5 (or more).
– The APD plots for lower bandwidth victim receivers show that peaks of the MB-OFDM signal are significantly attenuated by the Rx filter, bringing them closer to the ideal Rayeligh APD.
– That peak interference powers due to MB-OFDM are similar to those caused by a 1MHz PRF impulse radio for <10MHz victim receiver bandwidths, whereas for >10MHz receiver bandwidths, significantly lower peak powers are obtained for MB-OFDM.
• Receiver thermal noise and other external interference sources will have a mitigating effect on the APD of an interfering MB-OFDM signal
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 18
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
MB-OFDM Interference Impact to In-band QPSK transmissions
Part 2
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 19
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Background
• Document 802.15-04/315r0 showed large( 9dB) increases in required S/I ratios required when MB-OFDM was the sole source of unwanted interference
• These results seemed intuitively unreasonable and therefore merited further investigation
• Uncoded QPSK transmissions of circa 33MHz bandwidth (66Mbps) were used as basis for comparison
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 20
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
QPSK Transmission System
BIT GENERATOR MULTIPLEXERSYMBOLMAPPER
16 x UPSAMPLE BY ZERO
INSERTION
RRC Filter with 33MHz
3dB bandwidth
ERROR COUNTER
DE-MULTIPLEXER
HARD DECISIONS
DECIMATIONRRC Filter with 33MHz
3dB bandwidth
+OFDM
INTERFERENCEGENERATOR(OR AWGN)
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 21
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Interference Scenario
33 MHz(8 sub-carriers)
QPSK System operates within this bandwidth.
The bandwidth is defined by a RRC filter with =0.5
Each OFDM sub-carrier is
modulated with random QPSK
symbols
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 22
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
33MHz QPSK System with AWGN
4 5 6 7 8 9 1010
-6
10-5
10-4
10-3
10-2
10-1
Eb/No [dB]
QP
SK
BE
R
simulation0.5*erfc(sqrt(Eb/No))
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 23
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
33MHz QPSK System with Continuous OFDM
4 5 6 7 8 9 1010
-6
10-5
10-4
10-3
10-2
10-1
Eb/Io [dB]
QP
SK
BE
R
simulation0.5*erfc(sqrt(Eb/Io))
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 24
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Continuous OFDM signal causes fewer errors than WGN for same S/(I+N)
• This claim may seem counter-intuitive at first• Consider that at high SNRs, errors are
caused by the tails of the Gaussian distribution (see “Error Region”, next slide)
• But with only 8 relevant sub-carriers the OFDM waveform is limited to 256 states in each of I and Q dimensions– Tails of the distribution poorly approximate
Gaussian noise.
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 25
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
-2 0 2 4 6 80
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45OFDM interferenceGaussian Noise
Monte Carlo Simulated PDFs of received symbols conditioned on txbits=‘1,1,1,…’
ERRORREGION
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 00
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
x 10-3
OFDM interferenceGaussian Noise
Eb/Io=7dB
500,000 transmitted bits
Real(rxsymbol) [V]
Probability Density
P(error) = area under the curve
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 26
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
Amplitude is Bounded over
all possible QPSK symbol permutations
Output states of 8-point IFFT with all 65536 possible QPSK symbol sets
Filter memory will add more states, but tails of distribution will remain limited in amplitude
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 27
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Prediction for ¼ duty cycle noise bursts
• Combined impact of 3-band hopping, zero prefix and guard interval is:165*3/128 = 3.8672– We will approximate the duty cycle ratio d = 4
• During, zero noise power periods zero bit errors should occur– Average BER is reduced by a factor of d
• During active noise bursts, noise power is d times higher than the long term average– Corresponding SNR reduced by a factor of d
00 1erfc/5.0erfc5.0 NEddNEBER bb
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 28
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
7 8 9 10 11 12 1310
-10
10-8
10-6
10-4
10-2
100
Eb/No [dB]
QP
SK
BE
R
simulation0.5*erfc(sqrt(Eb/No))0.125*erfc(0.5*sqrt(Eb/No))
Simulation with ¼ duty cycle noise bursts as interferer
Previous Reference for uncoded QPSK
Expected reference for ¼ duty noise
bursts
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 29
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Simulation with ¼ duty cycle OFDM as interferer
7 8 9 10 11 12 1310
-10
10-8
10-6
10-4
10-2
100
Eb/Io [dB]
QP
SK
BE
R
simulation0.5*erfc(sqrt(Eb/Io))0.125*erfc(0.5*sqrt(Eb/Io))
Previous Reference for uncoded QPSK
Expected reference for ¼ duty noise
bursts
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 30
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
How meaningful is ¼ duty-cycle noise/interference?
• The above plots assume that for ¾ of the time, the system noise temperature is 0 Kelvin.– We want to be more realistic than that
• Let’s assume the QPSK victim has a constant Eb/No of 10dB (the uncoded BER is expected to be erfc(100.5)/2 3.87 x 10-6).
• Vary Eb/(No+Io) by introducing ¼ duty cycle MB-OFDM, starting with Io=0 Watts and increasing
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 31
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Simulation with ¼ duty cycle OFDM + Continuous AWGN
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1010
-6
10-5
10-4
10-3
10-2
10-1
Eb/(No+Io) [dB]
QP
SK
BE
R
AWGN Noise Eb/No fixed at 10dB
simulation0.5*erfc(sqrt(Eb/(No+Ni)))0.125*erfc(0.5*sqrt(Eb/(No+Ni)))
<2 dB
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 32
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
QPSK BER Conclusions• A continuous OFDM interferer has a more
benign error inducing property than AWGN when each is applied at the same S/(I+N)
• Under conditions of zero thermal noise, where the interferer has a fixed duty cycle, d, the average BER is closely bounded by
• Realistic conditions call for a non-zero value for background thermal noise– In a reasonable test case, deviation of the BER
curve from the AWGN case was limited to 2dB
01erfc/5.0 NEddBER b
Sept 2004
C. Razzell, PhilipsSlide 33
doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0412r0
Submission
Overall Conclusions
• Impulse radios showed a more harmful APD plot than 3-band MB-OFDM for all cases where (Rx Bandwidth)/PRF 5.
• Low bandwidth (5MHz) cases have also been simulated, revealing close resemblance of the APDs to impulse radios of the same PRF, and much lower peak-to-mean ratios compared to the wideband case.
• Testing the impact of MB-OFDM on a QPSK transmission system showed that the required SNR increase is always less than 10log(d), but in realistic scenarios, with continuous AWGN also present, the impact was reduced to below 2dB.