WTpg ARD B.

Micheli

Network Design Guidelines: Optimized Design Aggressive Design

1. Scope ..................................................................................................................................................2 2. Network Design Guidelines .............................................................................................................2 2.1 Target.............................................................................................................................................2 2.2 Losses vs. system margin ............................................................................................................4 2.3 Radio configuration....................................................................................................................4 2.4 Antennas.......................................................................................................................................5 2.5 Calculation Methods..................................................................................................................6 2.6 Frequency Plan............................................................................................................................7 2.7 General Considerations.............................................................................................................8 Annex 1 Anomalous Propagation (Propagation by Ducts) ......................................................9 Annex 2 LSY 2RX / LSY 4RX: configurations schematic summary............................................10

Alcatel-Lucent - All rights reserved

Date June 7, 2009

Issue 01

Page 1/10

Passing on and copying of this document, use and communication of its contents not permitted without written authorization.

WTpg ARD B. Micheli

1. Scope
Scope of the document is to give the set of main guidelines: 1. to always make the microwave network design(=dimensioning) be optimized, that means to always define the minimum set of features/materials so that to fulfil the Customers technical expectations according to the wanted/agreed overall degree of network reliability 2. to make the microwave design be aggressive (=design that has no safety margin), when the circumstances allow it or it is needed from commercial point of view. The suggestions related to aggressive design will be marked in red.

2. Network Design Guidelines

In the document Offer Optimization Guidelines for Wireless Transmission Division1 a set of guidelines to prepare optimized offers is reported: indications concerning how to select equipment, configuration, antennas, etc are reported in that reference tendering document. In the following sub-sections instead, focus is pointed on network dimensioning (=link budgets and interferences calculation) optimization.

2.1 Target
a. Target definition is mandatory. Before any radio dimensioning, a quality/unavailability target has to be defined in order to optimize the dimensioning (=not to over-dimension the network). Even if the target is not specified by the Customer, it has to be reasonable assumed, agreed2 with the Customer and clearly specified in the design documents. A warning note must be included mentioning that any change in the assumed targets will drive to changes in the final link configurations and therefore the final price. b. Target is intended to be propagation-related. For strict microwave dimensioning (=link budgets/interferences calculation), it has to be clearly defined which is the portion of the overall target that can be allocated to outage due to propagation against the remaining portion to be allocated to outage due to hardware failures/human interventions. For aggressive design -unless any different constraints- the target can be considered entirely propagation-related. This has to be plainly stated in the design assumptions section of the report.

Offer Optimization Guidelines For Wireless Transmission Division, Originator F. Tomaiuolo, August 2007. In case it is difficult to get agreement, showing alternative designs (at least for a hops sub-set, as sample) corresponding to alternative targets (promoted and not promoted) could help to make the Customer realize, quantify and appreciate the reasons why the promoted target is suitable for his expectations.
2

Alcatel-Lucent - All rights reserved

Date June 7, 2009

Issue 01

Page 2/10

Passing on and copying of this document, use and communication of its contents not permitted without written authorization.

WTpg ARD B. Micheli

c. Target can be ITU-based, Reliability Bellcore Standard-based or customized for a specific customer If target is ITU-based: ITU-R F.1668 and ITU-R F.1703 are the reference ITU Recommendations respectively for Quality and Unavailability targets definition. The target is end-to-end connection based.

If target is Reliability Bellcore Standard-based: The target is a time percentage of non-outage. Target is hop based (=related to each single hop).

If targets are customized for a specific customer (=non ITU. Non ANSI), then Values of proposed targets (quality and availability as defined by ITU.R) have to be derived from previous experience with that customer on the areas where links are going to be installed. Values will be hop based. Values will be agreed with customer before starting the ND.

d. Target has to be services-fitting. If no constraints are specified by the Customer, a reasonable trade-off between wanted service /s to be carried and related expected quality has to be decided. If, for instance, only data have to be transported, the quality level of the network is expected to be not as demanding as in case of voice is carried. Both ITU and Bellcore methods allows a degree of freedom when setting the targets. For aggressive design, if target definition allows a degree of freedom3, the most relaxed target should be considered. e. ITU target is end-to-end connection based. If target is ITU-based4 (i.e. end-to-end connection based) the dimensioning has to guarantee the end-to-end target only, i.e. inside the connection the dimensioning can be elastic because each hop does not have its own target: therefore any critical (for whatever reason) hop is not a problem as far as the overall connection respects the end-to-end target. f. Target is not the only parameter driving the dimensioning. Suitable fade margin vs. hop length has always to be guaranteed. g. Target is supposed to be considered in its entirety. To optimize the design, the dimensioning has to stick as much as possible5 the target: it means that no safety margin on the target (= cutting the target and considering as reference a fraction of it) has to be applied6.

For instance: for High Quality, if ITU-R F.1668 National Portion Long Hauls is selected, then the fixed allocation percentage (selectable in the range 1%-2%) should be set at 2% to get the most relaxed target. 4 Target can be ITU-based or, in alternative, Bellcore Standard-based, that means time percentage of reliability related to each single hop. 5 Always guaranteeing suitable margin vs. hop length.

Alcatel-Lucent - All rights reserved

Date June 7, 2009

Issue 01

Page 3/10

Passing on and copying of this document, use and communication of its contents not permitted without written authorization.

WTpg ARD B. Micheli

2.2 Losses vs. system margin

a. Any losses have to be considered. Not to under-dimension the network, losses due to any branching, waveguide, coupler, flex-twist (dependent on considered antennas/equipment configuration and frequency band) have to be properly inserted in the calculation. b. The safety tolerance on system margin should be limited. If 1 or 2 dB of tolerance on system margin is already considered7, then no other losses should be added. For aggressive design, tolerance should not exceed 1 dB. c. In HST configuration losses related to zero-failures case have to be considered. Whatever the equipment, in the HST configuration that implies the unbalanced coupler use, the losses associated to the main path (=the default path in case of zero failures) are those to be considered8. d. In case of full indoor equipment, extra-meters of waveguides should be limited. In the link budget calculation, unless any different constraints, the waveguide length should be equal to the antenna height + some extra meters9, in general between 10 and 20. For aggressive design, the extra-meters should not exceed 10, not to introduce too great extraloss.

2.3 Radio configuration

a. No diversity improvement is expected at high frequency. Diversity (FD10, SD11, FD+SD) gives no improvement where rain effect is the most impairing effect i.e. at high frequency. b. Space Diversity has to be used only when needed. Diversity has to be adopted mainly to counteract selective fading. Space diversity is much more effective than frequency diversity and more costly as well: thats why space diversity should be adopted just in case of: long12 hops, i.e. hops that are more affected by selective fading effect. Anyway, as far as an hop is expected to work fine without SD, even if with great antennas at both the endsites, SD should be not adopted. over-water hops, to counteract any reflections.
I.e. if, for instance, the ITU end-to-end target is 100 SES, 100 SES and not less is the reference not to be exceeded. To take into account any additional losses due to any reason in field. 8 The losses associated to the spare path (= the one that replaces the main one during the failure time) are greater: considering the spare path losses would lead to over-dimension. 9 To take into account any needed curvatures. 10 Frequency Diversity. 11 Space Diversity.
7 6

Alcatel-Lucent - All rights reserved

Date June 7, 2009

Issue 01

Page 4/10

Passing on and copying of this document, use and communication of its contents not permitted without written authorization.

WTpg ARD B. Micheli

c. Space Diversity improvement has to be up limited. In the link budget calculation the spacing between main and diversity antennas has to be up limited to 200xwavelength, whereas in field the spacing can be and is suggested to be if possible- greater. If the spacing in the link budget is greater than 200xwavelength, the validity range of the space diversity improvement formula is exceeded: consequently the calculated improvement13 is greater but not reliable14. This unreliable good improvement would lead to under-dimension. d. Frequency Diversity is more effective as greater is the spacing between the channels. Greater is the spacing between channels, greater is the expected decorrelation and greater is the FD expected improvement. e. Frequency Reuse15 (=Co-Channel Operation) should be avoided. Frequency reuse should be considered if and only if capacity increasing is needed and no additional frequencies are available. Cross-Polar Interference Canceller (XPIC) device -when available- is not ideal; therefore a residual cross-polar interference will lead to worse expected performance than in case of no-reuse. f. Split mount vs. full indoor equipment choice has to be carefully evaluated. A set of different considerations drive the choice. Among them, waveguide length has to be taken into account: split mount is preferable than full indoor equipment in case of too long waveguides (=too great losses).

2.4 Antennas
a. Dual polarized antennas have to be considered only if needed. Dual polarized antennas -more costly than single polarized antennas- have to be considered only if both V and H polarizations are used or if expansion on orthogonal polarization is foreseen. b. Ultra-High performance antennas have to be considered only if needed. Ultra-High performance antennas considerably more costly than standard antennas- have to be considered only if frequency reuse (co-channel operation) is used and the standard XPD=30dB is not sufficient enough to have predicted values of performances in imposed targets or if interference related issues have to be avoided. c. In Space Diversity configuration, antennas diameters allocation has to be smart. In general, main antenna is Tx and Rx, diversity antenna is Rx only. If main and diversity antenna do not have the same diameter, the smallest diameter is suggested to be the one of the diversity

How much long depends on the geoclimatic (=propagation) condition of the considered worlds region. Greater the spacing, greater the improvement. 14 When spacing exceeds the validity range, the real improvement cannot be assessed, i.e. the calculated improvement is not a reliable quantification. 15 Two different signals carried on the same frequency over the two orthogonal polarizations V and H.
13

12

Alcatel-Lucent - All rights reserved

Date June 7, 2009

Issue 01

Page 5/10

Passing on and copying of this document, use and communication of its contents not permitted without written authorization.

WTpg ARD B. Micheli

antenna, so that the reduced gain (due to reduced diameter) is just on diversity reception and not on transmission. d. In Space Diversity configuration, antennas allocation on the infrastructures has to take into account antennas weight and exposure to wind. If main and diversity antennas do not have the same diameter, main antenna as specified in the previous item c- is suggested to be the greatest. It means that it even has the greatest weight and exposure to wind. Therefore -even if in general main antenna is mounted higher than the diversity so that to better guarantee LOS (Line-of-Sight) between main Site A and main Site B-, depending on the available infrastructure, due to antennas weight and exposure to wind, in some cases it could be preferable to mount main antenna lower than the diversity if LOS criteria allow. In that case, after main-diversity positions switch, it is important: To re-check LOS between main Site A and main Site B. In case of full indoor equipment, to reverse the waveguide lengths: shorter waveguides for main antenna connection. e. Antennas heights have to be optimized so that to get optimized infrastructures and installation. Unless any different constraints16, antennas heights optimization (=calculation of the minimum antennas heights needed to get LOS) is important and has to consider the following aspects: Antennas heights optimization made by Pathloss v 4.0 relies on the considered terrain elevations database. Each terrain elevation database has its own tolerance that has to be taken into account to exclude total/partial path obstruction. Antennas heights optimization strictly depends on the adopted frequency band17. A reliable antennas heights optimization can be carried out only basing on survey data. Greater is the radio-path inclination, better is the expected performance

2.5 Calculation Methods

a. The MW design approach (=set of calculation methods) is supposed to be homogeneous. The MW design approach is supposed to be fully view mixing the two approaches is meaningless. b. The recommended approach is ITU. The ITU approach is reported in Recommendation ITU-R P. 530 Propagation data and prediction methods required for the design of terrestrial line-of-sight systems. c. Assuming to work ITU-R P.530 compliant, Equipment Signature is the method to calculate the outage due to selective fading.
18

ITU or fully ANSI. From a technical point of

Already existing infrastructures, already limited space on the existing infrastructures. Line-of-Sight (LOS) depends on the first Fresnel zone that in turn- depends on the considered frequency band. I.e. P0(=fading occurrence factor) and Selective Fading outage calculation method are supposed to be both according to ITU or both according to ANSI.
17 18

16

Alcatel-Lucent - All rights reserved

Date June 7, 2009

Issue 01

Page 6/10

Passing on and copying of this document, use and communication of its contents not permitted without written authorization.

WTpg ARD B. Micheli

d. Assuming to work ITU-R P.530 compliant, the fade occurrence factor (P0) can be calculated according to 530 version 7-8 or 9. The P0 calculation method supposed to be -in general- more reliable and therefore recommended by default is according to ITU-R P.530 7-8. Detailed guidelines about P0 calculation methods selection (version 7-8 vs. 9) are reported in ITU propagation data & prediction methods [ITU.R P530-8 vs 530-9 comparison]. For aggressive design, P0 calculated according to 530 9 can be considered19. If P0 530-9 is supposed to be reliable, then for technical consistency- it should be used for both pre and post-sales phase. e. Assuming to work ITU P.530 compliant, the improvement of 4RX ITU formula20 has to be carefully evaluated. 4RX ITU formula is not properly implemented by Pathloss v. 4.0. Namely 4RX calculation made by Pathloss is according to 2RX ITU formula that leads to expected outage overestimation. This could lead to over-dimension the specific hop either to conclude that it is not feasible unless the hop shortening. The link budget check according to the correct 4RX ITU formula is recommended.

2.6 Frequency Plan

a. The Frequency Band has to be carefully selected. The following aspects have to be considered: The frequency band selection has direct impact on the Fresnel zone and therefore on the LOS. Higher frequency band implies higher losses. High frequency band implies high rain effect: outage due to rain is expected to be greater on polarization H (the most affected by rain) than on polarization V. Any constraints imposed by the Country Regulator Authority related to allowed frequency band vs. hop length has to be verified before starting the design. The frequency band should be selected so that to minimize the risk of interferences with any other Operators on-air. b. The Frequency Plan target is to ensure no-interferences using the minimum number of channels. To get the target the following aspects have to be considered: The proper (ref. to Annex F in Offer Optimization Guidelines for Wireless Transmission Division) frequencies and polarizations alternation has to be applied so that to minimize the number of needed channels, that allows to minimize the number of channels licenses and related fees.

19 A check on both P0 530 7-8 and 9 expected values is recommended to verify that 530 9 is actually more aggressive than 530 7-8 for the considered specific area/project. 20 4RX concept applies to 9600LSY only. The 2RX/4RX conceptual schemes are reported in Annex 3.

Alcatel-Lucent - All rights reserved

Date June 7, 2009

Issue 01

Page 7/10

Passing on and copying of this document, use and communication of its contents not permitted without written authorization.

WTpg ARD B. Micheli

The proper Tx High-Tx Low alternation has to be applied to avoid Hi-Lo violations (=autointerferences).

In ring topology, if one single frequency band is used, not to have Hi-Lo violations the number of sites has to be even.

To avoid any over-reach issues, chains of aligned hops should be avoided in the network layout definition phase.

2.7 General Considerations

a. Anomalous propagation (propagation by ducts) effects are unpredictable. The clause in Annex 1 relevant to anomalous propagation should always be included in the design delivery technical report, even when the risk of ducts occurrence is low21. This is important to make the Customer aware that, even if the design is made in compliance with the declared calculation methods and regional geoclimatic parameters, nobody can exclude either quantify the effect of any anomalous propagation events. b. The overall network design takes advantage of spare parts optimization. For the spare parts optimization purpose, the variety of equipments and configurations used inside the network should be limited.

21

Average year surface duct occurrence risk (%) is mapped inside Recommendation ITU-R 453-9 - Figure 18.

Alcatel-Lucent - All rights reserved

Date June 7, 2009

Issue 01

Page 8/10

Passing on and copying of this document, use and communication of its contents not permitted without written authorization.

WTpg ARD B. Micheli

Annex 1 Anomalous Propagation (Propagation by Ducts)

The official ITU data (for example ITU-R P.453-9) while prove well adequate for the calculations, are not suitable for evaluation of anomalous propagation behaviours due to extremely sub/super-refractive gradients. In fact, phenomena like thermal inversions which can cause, in the worst case, a complete loss of signal (the so called "Black-out") are typical of certain areas and inside these areas are usually localized into specific limited zones (e.g. coastal, desertic, river valley). The available ITU data are average values for a very large territory which in practice might actually present completely different behaviors from one area to another. Therefore this information cannot be used for predicting the occurrence of probability of anomalous propagations nevertheless they do serve to alert of the potential problem. We would like to stress the fact that anomalous propagation conditions are quite unpredictable from the theoretical point of view. Abnormal fading conditions include, but are not limited to: formation of extreme radio refractivity gradients associated with: o o o o exceptionally large temperature inversions abnormal temperature/humidity layers fog formation signal trapping caused by surface or atmospheric ducting

reflections from unidentifiable off-path terrain features or physical structures rain fading due to rainfall rates that are in excess of the published rates or charts used to predict rain induced outages

For the above reasons, notwithstanding the design has been carried out according to the latest state of the art, Alcatel-Lucent cannot be deemed responsible for loss of system performance due to unpredictable anomalous propagation conditions. Nevertheless every initial practicable action should be taken right from the start, in the attempt to keep to a minimum the anomalous propagation probability without affecting the initial cost of the project. The possible classical countermeasures against anomalous propagation are: - Radio beam passing as high as possible over the lower atmospheric layers with strongly and more frequently negative refractivity gradients. High Low antennas arrangement (antenna placed as low and as high as possible respectively at the two ends of the path). Use (when possible) of not very directive antennas with wide radiation pattern.

Alcatel-Lucent - All rights reserved

Date June 7, 2009

Issue 01

Page 9/10

Passing on and copying of this document, use and communication of its contents not permitted without written authorization.

WTpg ARD B. Micheli

Annex 2 LSY 2RX / LSY 4RX: configurations schematic summary

fx and fy are two different frequencies SD = Space Diversity

2RX 2 Receivers

fx and fy coming from the same antenna OR from different antennas

4RX 4 Receivers

Alcatel-Lucent - All rights reserved

Date June 7, 2009

Issue 01

Page 10/10

Passing on and copying of this document, use and communication of its contents not permitted without written authorization.