View
36
Download
15
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
GSM RNO Training-Coverage Problems and Solutions_R2.0
Citation preview
Internal Use Only▲
Coverage Problems and SolutionsR2.0
Suitable for staff with junior P&O skill certificates (lower than certificate III)Issued by Network Optimization System Dept.
GSM Training Materials forGSM Training Materials for Skill Certificates Skill Certificates
Internal Use Only▲
Version Introduction
Version Date Author Reviewed by Amendment Records
R1.0 2007-6-21 Ji Jun Gan Wenjun First edition
R2.0 2009-3-13 Ji Jun Gan Wenjun The document template was renewed.
Internal Use Only▲
Training Goals
To know different kinds of coverage problems, their causes and solutions.
Internal Use Only▲
Contents
Overview of Coverage ProblemsMain Causes of Coverage Problems and SolutionsProcedure of Handling Coverage Problems
Typical Cases
Internal Use Only▲
Overview of Coverage Problems
Weak coverage
Over coverage
No-serving cell coverage
Too small coverage range will cause high call drop rate and a large number of customer complaints.
Too large coverage will result in frequent handovers, and mutual interference as well, if it’s rather serious, and network indicators will also be affected.
When cell reselection parameters and handover scenarios are similar, or there are two or more cells with similar signal strength, pingpong handover is easy to be caused during calls.
Internal Use Only▲
Contents
Overview of Coverage ProblemsMain Causes of Coverage Problems and SolutionsProcedure of Handling Coverage Problems
Typical Cases
Internal Use Only▲
Main Causes of Weak Coverage
Weak coverage
too small BTS power
too low antenna height
too small down-tilt
hardware problem
Obstruction of buildings
Internal Use Only▲
Main Causes of Over Coverage
too high antenna height
inappropriate down-tilt
poor antenna performance
Internal Use Only▲Causes of No-Serving Cell Coverage unreasonable planning of antenna parameters
inappropriate type of antenna
too large or too small carrier transmission power
shrunk coverage caused by equipment problem
influence caused by changes of radio environment
unreasonable setting of handover parameters
unreasonable setting of cell reselection parameters
no coverage of serving cell
Internal Use Only▲
Contents
Overview of Coverage ProblemsMain Causes of Coverage Problems and SolutionsProcedure of Handling Coverage Problems
Typical Cases
Internal Use Only▲
Procedure of Handling Coverage Problems Check settings of problem BTS’ radio parameters
Check whether strong interference source exists
Check hardware
Check antenna system
Analyze the local geographical environment to see whether site location and type of site are appropriate
Internal Use Only▲
Contents
Overview of Coverage ProblemsMain Causes of Coverage Problems and SolutionsProcedure of Handling Coverage Problems
Typical Cases
Internal Use Only▲
Poor Coverage at Cold Storage Warehouse Problem description
Subscribers complained about the poor coverage around a cold storage warehouse of animal foodstuff; it was difficult to detect signal even when they were not far from the warehouse.
Problem analysis According to subscriber’s feedback, we confirmed there was
problem about coverage around the warehouse. We found all radio parameters of the site were set correct at OMCR. Statistical report showed that data of idle interference band and of UL/DL quality distribution were normal. Hardware operated normally, as shown in OMCR warning report.
Hardware engineers went to the site and checked the system of the BTS, tested power amplifier's power and VSWR, they were all shown normal. Connection between equipment was correct. Antenna azimuth and down-tilt were all set reasonably.
Through DT on site, network engineers found that the signal strength of the antenna main lobe was weak, while that of the side lobes was stronger, so they tentatively confirmed the problem was due to antenna fault.
Internal Use Only▲
Poor Coverage at Cold Storage Warehouse
Problem handling After the antenna was replaced with a new one, the coverage
improved greatly, so did the voice quality.
Internal Use Only▲
Poor Coverage of a BTS
Problem description Subscribers complained about weak signal strength around a Food
Bureau (near a BTS). Problem analysis
According to subscriber’s complaint, we confirmed there was problem with the BTS' coverage. We found all radio parameters of the site were set correct at OMCR. Statistical report showed that idle data of interference band and UL/DL quality distribution were normal. Hardware operated normally, as shown in OMCR warning report.
Hardware engineers went to the site and checked the system of the BTS, tested amplifier's power and VSWR, they were all shown normal. Connection between equipment was correct. Antenna azimuth and down-tilt were all set reasonable.
Through DT on site, network optimization engineers found that the BTS’ coverage was in normal condition. While the Food Bureau, where subscribers complained about the signal, was 4km away from the BTS, and only indoor signal was weak (covered by Cell2).
Internal Use Only▲
Poor Coverage of a BTS
Problem handling After we confirmed there
was nothing wrong with parameters and equipment, we suggested to adjust the equipment of Cell2 (which had only 1 TRX) (to bypass CDU combiner and reduce pathloss).
Tested cell Before power adjustment
After power adjustment
Cell2 16W ( power after CDU ) 32W ( power
after CDU )
Test place Before adjustment After adjustment Food warehouseCell 2
Outdoor level:- 87dbm-- - 97dbmPoor speech quality;
Impossible to establish
call indoors
Cell 2Outdoor level:- 76dbm-- - 86dbmGood speech qualityIndoor level:- 86dbm-- - 96dbmNormal speech with a little noise
Internal Use Only▲
Handle Shrunk Coverage
Problem description After the BTS has been operating for a period of time, some of the areas,
which were covered before, became blind coverage or weak coverage area.
Problem analysis The BTS was an isotropic site with a height of 50m and power of 40W.
Normally, this kind of BTS can cover a distance of 4km. The coverage of this BTS (ARFCN 124) became smaller by DT. At place 1km away from the BTS, the MS receive level dropped to bellow -85dBm.
The BTS has been operating for 2 years, but the rack dust shelter has never been cleaned ever since the beginning. After we took out the dust gauze, we saw plenty of dust, which greatly abated the rack fan’s ability to ventilate and chill equipment and hindered TRX, PA and combiner to radiate heat, thus their normal operation was affected.
We took down and cleaned the dust gauze, then reinstalled it. From analysis of a new round DT of the same area, we found the coverage improved greatly than before. MS receive level at the former place increased by 5 ~ 10dB.
Internal Use Only▲
Coverage Shrinking After BTS Commissioning
Problem description After Cell3 of a BTS started to operate, its coverage range was
found shrunk. On highway 3km away from the BTS, where the BTS tower was visible, MS could not detect Cell3’s signal. MS could receive signal when it’s around the BTS, and the signal level was about -60dB.
Problem analysis We checked in radio resource management centre and found
Cell3’s static power class was set 2, which meant its static power was reduced by 4dB, so we reset it to be 0. The next day, MS on highway 3km away from the BTS could receive Cell3’s signal, and its level was -60—70; and the signal level around the BTS was strong, which was about -40dB.
we concluded that the cell’s coverage shrinking was caused by wrong setting of static power control at OMCR.
Internal Use Only▲
High Handover Failure Rate Due to Skip-Zone Coverage Problem description
Configuration of a mountain site was S11, and the local network was single band GSM900. From indicator statistics of the last week, we found handover success rate of Cell2 under the BTS kept very low, which was around 80%, while TCH allocation failure rate was completely normal.
Problem analysis First, we could exclude the possibility of hardware problem and interference,
because there were no TCH assignment failures, which explained that MS could successfully occupy TCHs assigned to it by BSC; from DT analysis, we could see when signal level was above -90dbm, no call drops happened to MS, and speech quality was good, which could prove that no serious interference existed. Through further analysis, we found the target cell for handover was a bit far from Cell2; and probably adjacent cell relations were not set right during assignment planning, which resulted in isolated-island effect.
we could make area A and area B become adjacent cells to Cell2; while Cell2 coverage at A and B was already very weak, so Cell2 should not be adjacent cell to A and B .
After adjustment, handover success rate of Cell2 increased greatly, from 80% to 96%.
Internal Use Only▲
High Handover Failure Rate Due to Skip-Zone Coverage
Internal Use Only▲
Question
Which parameters can be adjusted to improve coverage?
Internal Use Only▲
Recommended