Showing posts with label RF Primer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RF Primer. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

RF Planning | RF Primer



RF planning is designed to address the two problems of multicellular networks. The first problem is to ensure that the coverage levels within the network are high enough that the expected data rates, based on the minimum required signal to noise ration, can be achieved at every useful square foot of the building or campus environment. The second problem is to avoid the intercell interference which results from multiple devices transmitting on the air without mitigation.
Proper RF planning is an expensive, time-consuming process. The basics of RF planning are for the installers to predict what the signal propagation properties will be in the expected environment. This sort of activity always requires using sophisticated RF prediction tools. RF prediction tools operate by requiring the operator to designate the locations and RF properties—attenuation, mostly—of each physical element in the building, the furniture, the walls, the floors, and the heavy machinery. Clearly a laborious process, the operator must copy in the location of these elements one at a time. Some tools are intelligent enough to take CAD drawings or floor-plan maps and estimate where the walls are, but an operator is required to verify that the guesses are not far from reality. RF planning tools then use RF calculations, based on electromagnetic principles, to determine how much the signal is diminished or attenuated by the environment. The planning tools need to know the transmit power capabilities and antenna gains of all of the access points that will be deployed in the network.
RF planning can be used this way to assist in determining where access points ought to be located, to maximize coverage given the particular SNR requirements. Because RF planning uses exact equations to predict the effects of the environment, it can be only as good as the information it is given. Operators must enter the exact RF and physical properties of the building to have a high likelihood of getting an accurate answer. For this reason, RF planning suffers from the garbage-in-garbage-out problem. If the operator has uncertainty about the makeup of the materials in the building, then the results of the RF plan share the same uncertainty.
Furthermore, RF planning cannot predict the effects of multipath. Multipath is more crucial than ever in wireless networking, because the latest Wi-Fi radios take advantage of that multipath to provide services and increase the data rate. Not being able to predict multipath places a burden on RF planning exercises, and requires RF planners to look for the worst-case scenarios.
Using RF planning tools to determine what power levels or channel settings each access point takes, then, is not likely to be a successful proposition as the network usage increases. Unfortunately, Wi-Fi self noise is a problem that does not show itself until the network is being heavily used, at which point it shows with vigor. Until then, as the network is just getting going, self noise will not be present at high levels and will not occupy 100% of the airtime. Thus, network administrators will see early successes with almost any positioning of Wi-Fi equipment, and can gain a false sense of security. (It is important to note that this is a property of trying to predict how RF propagates. Tools or infrastructure that constantly monitor and self-tune suffer the same problems, but with the added wrinkle that the self-tuning is disruptive, and yet will be triggered when the noise increases and the network needs to be disrupted the least.)
The one place where RF planning shows strength is in determining a rough approximation of the number and position of access points that are needed to cover a building. This does not require the sort of accuracy as complete RF plan, and tends to work well because of the fact that Wi-Fi networks are planned for a much higher minimum SNR than is necessary to cover the building. That higher SNR is required, however, to establish a solid data rate, and so what appears to be padding or overprovisioning from a coverage point of view can be lost capacity from a data rate point of view. Nonetheless, determining the rough number of access points needed for large deployments is a task that can do with some automation, and RF planning tools used only to plan for coverage (and not for interference), can be reasonably effective—even more so if the infrastructure that is deployed is able to tolerate the co-channel interference that is generated.

Monday, October 24, 2011

Channels | RF Primer



One Wi-Fi radio does not occupy the entire unlicensed spectrum, unlike frequency-hopping technologies such as Bluetooth. 802.11 divides up the spectrum into a number of different channels. Channels are named with whole numbers, assigned by a formula to specific center frequencies for the channels. The idea behind small number of discreet channels is to carve up the spectrum, helping pack in as many devices as possible and avoiding requiring clients to have to tune in across a wide range of frequencies, the way that analog car radios must.
The channel numbers are somewhat arbitrary, and are arranged to let you know what band they occupy. Different 802.11 radio types allow for different channel selections.
The two key properties that define how the 802.11 radio uses the spectrum are its center frequency and bandwidth. The center frequency is the one the radio uses to determine where to look for the transmissions. This concept is similar to car radios: FM channel 97.3 means that the radio tunes its center frequency to 97.3MHz. Unfortunately, Wi-Fi channels do not convert as neatly to their center frequencies. Because of this, many people and tools will either interchangeably use the center frequency or the channel number to describe the channel. Wi-Fi uses center frequencies that are always in the gigahertz range. The bandwidth tells which other frequencies are occupied by a transmission. 802.11 radios used for mobility primarily have 20MHz bandwidth, except for 802.11n radios, which can also use 40MHz bandwidths. The channel and bandwidth together show which part of the spectrum the radio occupies. Although the different 802.11 radio types may fill the carved-out part of the spectrum differently, the amount that is carved out is roughly the same for the same bandwidth. Figure 1 sketches the general concept.

 
Figure 1: Shape of 802.11 Frequency Occupation
Table 1 lists the channels and what radio types can use them.
Table1: 802.11 Channels 
Channel
Frequency
US Band
11b, 11g
11a
11n
Notes
1
2.412GHz
ISM 2.4
✓
 
✓
Nonoverlapping
High power: 1 W maximum.
2
2.417GHz
 
✓
 
✓
  
3
2.422GHz
 
✓
 
✓
  
4
2.427GHz
 
✓
 
✓
  
5
2.432GHz
 
✓
 
✓
  
6
2.437GHz
 
✓
 
✓
Nonoverlapping
 
7
2.442GHz
 
✓
 
✓
  
8
2.447GHz
 
✓
 
✓
  
9
2.452GHz
 
✓
 
✓
  
10
2.457GHz
 
✓
 
✓
  
11
2.462GHz
 
✓
 
✓
Nonoverlapping
 
12
2.467GHz
 
✓
 
✓
Europe, Japan, Australia. No U.S. or Canada
 
13
2.472GHz
 
✓
 
✓
  
14
2.484GHz
 
11b only
  
Japan only. Channel 14 does not follow the channel to frequency formula.
 
36
5.18GHz
U-NII 2 Lower
 
✓
✓
Indoor use only. Low power: 40 mW maximum
 
40
5.20GHz
  
✓
✓
  
44
5.22GHz
  
✓
✓
  
48
5.24GHz
  
✓
✓
  
52
5.26GHz
U-NII 2 Upper
 
✓
✓
Non-DFS for equipment before July 2007
Radar detection and dynamic frequency selection (DFS) required
56
5.28GHz
  
✓
✓
  
60
5.30GHz
  
✓
✓
  
64
5.32GHz
  
✓
✓
  
100
5.50GHz
U-NII 2 Extended
 
✓
✓
  
104
5.52GHz
  
✓
✓
  
108
5.54GHz
  
✓
✓
  
112
5.56GHz
  
✓
✓
  
116
5.58GHz
  
✓
✓
  
120
5.60GHz
  
✓
✓
U.S., Europe, and Japan. No Canada, because of weather radar.
 
124
5.62GHz
  
✓
✓
  
128
5.64GHz
  
✓
✓
  
132
5.66GHz
  
✓
✓
  
136
5.68GHz
  
✓
✓
  
140
5.70GHz
  
✓
✓
  
149
5.745GHz
U-NII 3
 
✓
✓
U.S, Canada and Europe. No Japan
High power
153
5.765GHz
  
✓
✓
  
157
5.785GHz
  
✓
✓
  
161
5.805GHz
  
✓
✓
  
165
5.825GHz
ISM 5.8
 
✓
✓
U.S., Canada and Europe. No Japan.
High power
The formula for the channels to frequencies is 2.407GHz + 0.5GHz * channel for the 2.4GHz band, and the simpler to remember 5GHz + 0.5GHz * channel for the 5GHz band. The only channels that are in the 2.4GHz band are channels 1-14. Everything else is in the 5GHz band. Therefore, channel 36 is 5.18GHz, and channel 100 is 5.50GHz.
The total number of channels is large, but many factors reduce the number that can be practically used. First to note is that the 2.4GHz band, where 802.11b and 802.11g run, only has three nonoverlapping channels (four in Japan) to choose from. Unfortunately, the eleven channel numbers available in the United States gives the false impression of 11 independent channels, and to this day there exist some Wi-Fi deployments that mistakenly use all 11 channels, causing an RF nightmare. To avoid overlapping channels, adjacent channel selections need to be four channel numbers apart. Therefore, channels 1 and 5 do not overlap. In the 2.4GHz band, custom usually spreads the channels out even a bit further, and using only channels 1, 6, and 11 is recommended. The authors of the standard recognized the problem the overlap causes, and, for the 5GHz band, disallowed overlap by preventing devices from using the intermediate channels. Therefore, no channels in the 5GHz band overlap, when it comes to 20MHz channels.
The unlicensed spectrum was originally designed for, and still is allocated to, other uses besides Wi-Fi. The 2.4GHz band was created to allow, in part, for microwave ovens to emit radio noise as they operate, as it is impractical to completely block their radio emissions. Because that noise prevented being able to provide the protections from interference that licensed bands have, the regulatory agencies allowed inventors to experiment providing other services in this band. And so began 802.11. The 5GHz band is, in theory, more set aside from radiation. Except for the top 5.8GHz ISM band, the 5GHz range was designed for communications devices. However, interference still exists. One primary source, and the one important from a regulatory point of view, is radar. Radars operate in the same 5GHz band. Because the radars are given priority, Wi-Fi devices in much of the 5 GHz band are required to either be used indoors only, or to detect when a radar is present and shut down or change channels. This last ability is known asdynamic frequency selection (DFS). This is not a feature or benefit, per se, but a requirement from the various governments. DFS complicates the handoff process significantly