Evolution of LTE and LTE-A - IEEE/CIC ICCCiccc2014.ieee-iccc.org/7. QC LTE Evolution for Rel-13 and Beyong...Evolution of LTE and LTE-A ... − Link budget increase of 10-15 dB in

1Qualcomm Proprietary

Evolution of LTE and LTE-ARel-13 and Beyond

Yongbin Wei

Qualcomm Research

October 2014, ICCC


LTE: Vibrant ecosystem and accelerating deployments

Global LTE network launches

LTE Connections (excludes M2M)

Source: www.gsacom.com

256Launches by 2013

>500Launches by 2017

~170mIn 2013

>1bBy 2017

<1%In 2008

13.4%By 2017

LTE Connection Percentage

http://www.gsacom.com/


“1000x data challenge”

Increasing system load

Cost for per-bit delivery

Smart phone penetration saturation

Definition of evolution

− A process of gradual and relatively peaceful social, political, and economic advance (Merriam-Webster)

Evolution of LTE and LTE-A

Emerging challenges


Evolution of LTE and LTE-A

More spectrum

• Licensed Shared Access (LAA)

• Authorized Shared Access (ASA) or

License Shared Access (LSA)1

More small cells

• Heterogeneous network

• Self-organized network (SON)

• Neighborhood small cells

• LTE+WiFi aggregation

2

Higher efficiency

• Advanced receiver

• 3D/FD-MIMO

• NOMA and MU-MIMO enhancements

• Opportunistic small cells

• Beyond PHY/MAC

3

More services

• Machine type communication (MTC)

• LTE Direct for proximity services

• LTE broadcast and group/multicast

• Low latency applications

4


Authorized Shared Access (ASA)


Authorized Shared Access (ASA)

Spectrum Aggregation

Supplemental Downlink

Exclusive licensed use on a shared and binary basis in time, location and/or frequency with incumbents

Licensed Approach

Auctions of cleared Spectrum

Complementary licensed model (ASA)

Authorized shared access

Unlicensed approach

Exclusive use

ASA – Shared exclusive use

Shared usePredictable QoS


ASA RepositoryInformation on ASA spectrum available

Protect Incumbent users– location, frequency and time

Pre-calculated exclusion zones and online calculated protection zones

ASA – Regulatory and Technology FrameworkRegulatory framework

ASA spectrum to be licensed is identified by the government

Subject to a private commercial agreement between incumbentand ASA licensee

ASA ControllerControls network access to ASA spectrum.

Network controls end user device spectrum

access

Operation and Maintenance

ASA Controller

Permitted ASA spectrumASA

Repository

Long term sharing andcommercial agreement

Grant/Award ASA rights

Incumbentspectrum holder

ASA licensee

Administrator regulator

Heartbeat message to verify connectivity

Spectrum requests grants/denials/updates

Heartbeat message to verify connectivity


3G/4G Macro base station

Benefits of ASA

Cost-effective

Incumbentuser

Regular multi-

band device1

Regularmulti-band device1

Network controls device spectrum access2

3G/4G small cells

Use available 3G/4G infrastructure

Complementsinstalled 3G/4G

Leverages existing 3GPP standards

Opportunity to aggregate

wider spectrum

Simple

Simple technology with defined interfaces

Regulatory framework1 No device impact due to ASA, just a regular 3G/4G device supporting global harmonized bands targeted for ASA. Carrier aggregation

would be beneficial to aggregate new ASA spectrum with existing spectrum, but is not required.2 The O&M system and control entities of the ASA rights holder enforces the permitted bands

3G/4G macrobase station

Controlled

Enables predictable quality of service

Protects incumbent from interference

ASA

Repository

Permitted ASAspectrum

ASA controller Incumbent


ASA

CANDIDATE

EXAMPLES

Applicable

Regions

EUROPE(Traditionally licensed

in e.g. India)

MENA(Traditionally licensed

in e.g. Europe)

USA, EU,

LATAM, SEAP

Incumbent

Users

Telemetry, public

safety, camerasVarious

Naval Radar (US)

Satellite (EU, LATAM. SEAP)

Suitable

Technology LTE TDD LTE FDD/TDD LTE TDD

Possible

Launch~2015

ASA – Licensed Harmonized Spectrum

Leveraging global, available 4G technologies to ensure economies of scale

2.6GHz

(100+ MHz)

2.3GHz

(100 MHz)

~3.5GHz

(100-200 MHz)

Key band for licensed small cells

Traditional licensed in most regions

ASA licensed in US

3.4-3.8 GHz

1 3GPP has already defined bands 42/43 for 3.4 GHz to 3.8 GHz, 3.5GHz in the US defined as 3550 – 3650 MHz, but up to 200MHz could be targeted for ASA in e.g. SEAP/LATAM. Note that ASA targets IMT

spectrum bands,

but the concept can be applied generally to all spectrum bands and other technologies

2.3-2.4 GHz

LSA (Licensed Shared Access)

Endorsed by EU 27 member states

Endorsed by CEPT

Standardized by ETSI


Licensed Assisted Access (LAA)


• LTE transmitted according to unlicensed spectrum regulation in unlicensed spectrum

• Accompanied by a licensed carrier

• Carrier Aggregation / Supplemental Downlink

• Dual Connectivity in the future

• Primary Carrier always uses licensed spectrum

• FDD or TDD

• Control signalling, mobility, user data

• Secondary Carrier(s) use unlicensed spectrum

• Best-effort user data in either DL-only or both DL and UL

LTE Licensed Assisted Access (LTE-LAA)

UL DL

Primary Carrier

Licensed Spectrum

Secondary Carrier

Unlicensed Spectrum


Extending the Benefits of LTE-A to Unlicensed Spectrum

Features to protect Wi-Fi neighbors

Longer range and increased capacity1

Thanks to LTE anchor in licensed spectrum with robust mobility

Common LTE network with common authentication, security and management.

Coexists with Wi-Fi Unified LTE Network

Better network performance Enhanced user experience

Carrier aggregation

Ideal for small cells

F1LTE in

Licensedspectrum

LTE inUnlicensedspectrum

5 GHz

700MHz to 3.8GHz

1 Compared to carrier Wi-Fi


Morehouse LTE-U and WiFi OTA Coverage

27/27

26/232/X

15/9

4/X

16/2

3/X

4/X

14/3

9/1

20/2

LTE Throughput/WiFi Throughput[Mbps]

29/16

24/26

eNB/AP

6/x35/27

14Qualcomm Proprietary3GPP model, two operators (A & B) each deploys 16 Picos per operator per macro cell. 3GPP Bursty traffic model with 1MB file. Baseline is 10MHz FDD LTE HetNets with FeICIC/IC. Unlicensed band in 5GHz with 12x40MHz. DL

2x2 MIMO for LTE, LTE-U and WiFi with rank 1 & 2. WiFi assumes 802.11ac (no MU-MIMO). LTE-U assumes no synchronization among operators.

DL Median User Throughput Gain(LTE-U SDL, 3GPP model, Scenario 1: 16 Picos per Macro cell per operator)

1X

7X

20X

13X

LTE HetNets LTE HetNet +

Operator A: WiFi

Operator B:WiFi

180%

increase

Gain for operator A is

maintained when operator

B upgrades to LTE-U

LTE HetNet +

Operator A: LTE-U

Operator B: WiFi

LTE HetNet +

Operator A: LTE-U

Operator B: LTE-U

LTE-U Improves Median User Rates in Pico Scenario

Uniform Scenario

7X

19X

15Qualcomm Proprietary3GPP model, two operators (A & B) each deploys 16 Picos per operator per macro cell. 3GPP Bursty traffic model with 1MB file. Baseline is 10MHz FDD LTE HetNets with FeICIC/IC. Unlicensed band in 5GHz with 12x40MHz. DL

2x2 MIMO for LTE, LTE-U and WiFi with rank 1 & 2. WiFi assumes 802.11ac (no MU-MIMO). LTE-U assumes no synchronization among operators.

DL 5%-tile User Throughput Gain(LTE-U SDL, 3GPP model, Scenario 1: 16 Picos per Macro cell per operator)

1X

1.3X

2X13X


Operator A: WiFi

Operator B:WiFi

50%

increase

LTE HetNet +

Operator A: LTE-U

Operator B: WiFi

LTE HetNet +

Operator A: LTE-U

Operator B: LTE-U

LTE-U Improves Tail User Rates in Pico Scenario

Uniform Scenario

1.3X

2.1X


DL Median User Throughput Gain(LTE-U SDL, 3GPP model, Scenario 3: 8 Picos per Macro cell per operator)

1X3.8X

14.4X13X


Operator A: WiFi

Operator B:WiFi

300%

increase

Very dense environments

highlights the advantages

of LTE-U

LTE HetNet +

Operator A: LTE-U

Operator B: WiFi

LTE HetNet +

Operator A: LTE-U

Operator B: LTE-U

LTE-U Improves Median User Rates in Pico Scenario

Cluster Scenario

3.6X

14.2X

3GPP model, two operators (A & B) each deploys 8 clustered Picos per macro cell. 3GPP Bursty traffic model with 1MB file. 2/3 of UEs per macro are within the cluster area. Baseline is 10MHz FDD LTE HetNets with FeICIC/IC.

Unlicensed band in 5GHz with 12x40MHz. DL 2x2 MIMO for LTE, LTE-U and WiFi with rank 1 & 2. WiFi assumes 802.11ac (no MU-MIMO). LTE-U assumes no synchronization among operators.


Certain regions only have tx power and emissions requirements− US, Korea, China and other markets

− In principle compatible with LTE Rel-10/11/12

− New RF band support (e.g. 5GHz) needed at both UE and eNB

− Coexistence and fair sharing can be achieved by non-standards, radio resource management implementation

Certain regions have additional channel occupancy requirements− Europe, Japan, India and many other markets

− LTE needs “Listen Before Talk” (LBT) feature based on PHY/MAC enhancements (ETSI EN 301 893 )

Regulatory Aspects for Unlicensed Operation


• Needed to discover and acquire access

• Multiple PLMNsDiscovery signals

• Needed to meet regional requirements (Europe, Japan)LBT using Clear Channel

Assessment (CCA)

• To reserve the channel for transmission following LBTChannel Reservation signals

• Modified to enable LBT

• UL modified to meet channel occupancy definition

Modified

DL & UL waveform

• Asynchronous HARQ design considering no guaranteed access to channel

Modified HARQ protocol

Envisioned PHY/MAC Features for LTE-U

18


LBT/CCA procedure creates new challenges to the system design

− Uncertainty and ambiguity between transmitters and receivers

− Receiver detection of the transmission on/off

− Discontinuous transmissions (DL and UL)

− Disruption of deterministic system timeline

− Synchronous HARQ is no longer a viable option

− L2 procedures needs to be adjusted

Impact of LBT/CCA


Enhancements to Machine-Type Communications


MTC requirements cater to a broad spectrum of services

− Metering (water, gas, electricity, parking)

− Connected Home (appliances, thermostats, lighting)

− Industrial (factories, robots)

LTE MTC design requirements

− Spectrum coexistence with smartphone services

− Critical for operators who choose to enter MTC services space

− Substantial coverage improvement

− Link budget increase of 10-15 dB in some scenarios

− Significantly lower cost than smartphones

− Very low power consumption

− 5-10 year battery life using 2 AA batteries (3600 mAh)

LTE MTC Requirements

21


Rel-12 defined PSM (power saving mode) and Cat-0 UE (primarily for MTC)

Rel-12 LTE doesn’t address the following requirements

− Coverage improvement

− Power consumption in idle state

− Cost reduction (beyond baseband)

Possible Rel-13 enhancements

− Simpler device capability

− Enhanced Coverage

− Power consumption reduction

Rel-13 LTE enhanced MTC (eMTC)

22


Simpler PHY and MAC

− Narrow RF of 1.08MHz (6RBs) only

− No MIMO (spatial multiplexing or precoded multi-user operation)

− Slow CQI feedback and HARQ

− Optimized for zero mobility

TTI bundling in downlink and uplink channels for coverage enhancements

− Broadcast channels

− Unicast (Control, Data)

Power consumption reduction

− Extended DRX support (I-DRX and C-DRX)

− Power efficient channel feedback

Rel-13 LTE enhanced MTC

23


LTE+WiFi Aggregation


CN-based offloading solutions for WLAN are useful for service & policy management, not for

radio efficiency

ANDSF not a useful tool for tight resource management (not even with R12)

RAN-level aggregation of LTE and WiFi provides many benefits:

− Dynamic allocation of resources based on RF and load conditions with enhanced interference management

− Higher aggregate user throughput & system throughput

− Real-time load balancing

− Minimal or no impact on core network and applications

− Unified network control and management of available resources (similar to LTE CA)

− RAN-level seamless handover support (i.e. IP continuity without core network changes)

Motivation


Possible LTE-WiFi Aggregation Solutions

RAN-level aggregation


Significant performance

improvement compared to

MP-TCP was observed

Due to the ability to react

to dynamic channel and

load conditions quickly

Performance Comparison of RAN aggregation to MP-TCP

Data collected over 3 days in Qualcomm campus (21 co-channel AP detected)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Mean 10th Percentile 50th Percentile 90th Percentile

MP-TCP 53.8 45.1 54.2 62.9

RLC Aggregation 68.9 59.6 70.6 76.4

Th

rou

gh

pu

t [M

bp

s]

Comparison of MP-TCP and RLC AggregationMP-TCP

RLC Aggregation

28%

32%

30%

21%


For more information on Qualcomm, visit us at:

www.qualcomm.com & www.qualcomm.com/blog

© 2013 Qualcomm Incorporated. All rights reserved. Qualcomm, Snapdragon, and Gobi are trademarks of Qualcomm Incorporated, registered in the United States and other

countries. Vuforia and Wireless Reach are trademarks of Qualcomm Incorporated. Atheros and Skifta are trademarks of Qualcomm Atheros, Inc., registered in the united States

and other countries. Hy-Fi is a trademark of Qualcomm Atheros, Inc. Alljoyn is a trademark of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc., registered in the United States and other

countries. Other products and brand names may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners.

Thank youFollow us on:

https://twitter.com/Qualcomm

https://twitter.com/Qualcomm

https://www.facebook.com/qualcomm

https://www.facebook.com/qualcomm

Documents

Evolution of LTE and LTE-A - IEEE/CIC ICCCiccc2014.ieee-iccc.org/7. QC LTE Evolution for Rel-13 and Beyong...Evolution of LTE and LTE-A ... − Link budget increase of 10-15 dB in