Co-channel and adjacent-channel interference evaluation of an outdoor telecommunications cabinet’s (BS) wireless reporting systems

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENTS OF ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING AND AUTOMATION ENGINEERING
TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE OF PIRAEUS
Module: CI7150: (Wireless Communications and Networks)
Module Coordinator: Dr. Stylianos Savvaidis & Dr. Myridakis Nikolaos
MSc IN NETWORKING AND DATA COMMUNICATIONS
COURSEWORK
MODULE:
CI7150: (Wireless Communications and Networks)
Module Coordinator:
Dr. Stylianos Savvaidis & Dr. Myridakis Nikolaos
Date of Module:
03/01/2015
Name of Student:
Stamatakis Konstantinos
Kingston University London

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENTS OF ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING AND AUTOMATION ENGINEERING
TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE OF PIRAEUS
Subject: Co-channel and adjacent-channel interference evaluation of an
outdoor telecommunications cabinet’s (BS) wireless reporting systems
Submission Date: 03/01/2015
Kingston University London

Stamatakis Konstantinos, MSc student in Networking & Data, TEI of Piraeus - Kingston University
3

Abstract— The objective of the present paper is to evaluate the
impact of adjacent and co-channel interference on the
performance of some standard report systems that exists in an
outdoor telecommunications cabinet - base station (BS) (also
known as KV, from the acronym of the German word
Kabelverzweiger) and devices that technicians frequently use.
Specifically, the interference analyzed is between devices, such as
Bluetooth handset, laptop and measurement tools, that are
usually used during inspections and repairs by technicians and
wireless reporting systems installed inside BS that provide
information about BS’s condition and real time connection with
the help desk back office
Index Terms— Adjacent and Co-channel Interference,
Wireless Reporting Systems, Coexistence, telecommunications
cabinet base station
I. INTRODUCTION
In the past decade wireless technologies have had an amazing
growth as they managed to overcome numerous limitations in
the fields of speed and quality of service (QoS), providing
users the ability of enjoying a variety of wireless technologies
required by different applications used in our every day life.
This growth made it almost impossible for various sectors of
industry to consider their operational status without the
existence of such wireless systems and inevitable, many of
their services and departments have been entirely replaced or
depend, to wireless communication systems. As a result, more
applications have been brought up, to enhance numerous
sectors of industry, by providing workers and employees with
a wide range of tools that help them to perform more efficient
at their tasks, reducing the amount of unwanted or
unnecessary actions that appear in the absence of wireless
communication access. For instance, technologies such as
Bluetooth, WiFi, WiMAX, ZigBee, or any other cordless
devices, usually operating at the 2.4 GHz ISM band, have
been considered to be mandatory in various appliances of
Stamatakis Konstantinos is a student of “MSc in Networking & Data
Communications” of TEI of Piraeus and Kingston University
(email: stamatakiskostas@yahoo.com)
industry because of their flexibility, mobility and fast
adaptability, in any event which takes place, in order to
perform at higher standard, with constant support and real
time feedback, increasing not only performance but also
contribute to other important factors such as security and
employers’ safety. This wireless technology adoption by ISM
industries in fields where real time reporting or feedback
support from back-office helpdesk is required, performs at the
unlicensed 2.4 GHz ISM band of radio frequency,
characterized by ITU [1]. With millions of mobile and fixed
wireless devices, the major issue that must be dealt with is the
interference because of coexistence between all these radio
devices operating simultaneous, with minimum possible
failure of operational status. Specifically as ITU answers the
way 2.4 GHz band is used, “Radio communication services
operating within these bands must accept harmful interference,
which may be caused by these applications. ISM equipment
operating in these bands is subject to the provisions of RR No.
15.13” [1].
In brief, most used protocols for 2.4GHz applications, are
WiFi, described by IEEE 802.11 family of protocols,
Bluetooth, an industrial protocol with huge commercial
success, described by IEEE 802.15.1, ZigBee, described by
IEEE 802.15.4-2003 and WiMAX, described accordingly by
IEEE 802.16 protocol, with 2.4GHz band included in, after the
802.16-2004 revision update. Interference problems, due to
the simultaneous operation of different protocols in 2.4GHz,
must be examined and confronted, as the majority of devices
operating at 2.4GHz demand connection reliability,
adaptability and high data rate.
This interference between systems using the 2.4 GHz band is
located in three main categories, Intersymbol Interference
(ISI), Co-Channel Interference (CCI) and Adjacent
Interference (ACI). Concisely, ISI is created due to multipath
propagation, while CCI and ACI are detected around the
spectrum of frequency over the dimension of time and both
are an enormous research field of communication science,
thoroughly examined and handled with different techniques
such as optimization algorithms, fixed or dynamic channel
Co-channel and adjacent-channel interference
evaluation of an outdoor telecommunications
cabinet’s (BS) wireless reporting systems

4
assignments, coding techniques and optimum engineering
improvement, to both physical and upper wireless network
layers. Despite all research, there is no final solution for
interference problems but all these approaches, combined
together, reduce major effect, aiming to evolve to a step
further than the traditional best effort approach and correspond
to criteria of higher QoS. In our case study, we will examine a
real-type scenario of simultaneous use between different
wireless technologies, at 2.4 GHz, used by technicians during
inspections and repairs inside an outdoor BS, part of the core
network of a telecommunication company’s wired backbone
MAN that supports the local area, focusing on CCI and ACI.
II. CO-CHANNEL AND ADJACENT INTERFERENCE
In general CCI arises when a frequency band is multi-
shared among different radios, synchronously through time,
due to excessive use of 2.4GHz, false network’s design plan,
extreme weather conditions, and finally re-uses of same
frequency in cellular networks. Specifically in cellular
networks, appears when neighboring cells start using the same
frequency at the same time and therefore this re-use decreases
one of key elements of the cellular network, the frequency
reuse factor (FRF). Along with re-use distance, both determine
frequency’s re-use ability, in order to enlarge capacity and
space coverage [2][4]. According to Dr. Wajih A. Abu-Al-
Saud (2010) and Ajal A. Jose (2013), we realize that in order
to increase network’s capacity, FRF must decrease, which
inevitable leads to higher CCI as the re-use distance between
cells decreases similarly [2][5]. But in this paper’s model
scenario, where is examined the behavior at 2.4 GHz, CCI can
also be treated with other approaches, such as spread spectrum
techniques, optimization algorithms, fixed and/or dynamic
channel assignment and power level transmission control, as
CCI is more vulnerable to interference from nearby wireless
sources that operate in the same or nearby frequency bands
[3][4].
To evaluate a system with CCI, all above approaches should
be examined, through simulations or real time adjustments to
observe which are more successful. Spread spectrum
techniques, used in IEEE 802.11 systems and applied with
frequency hopping at the PHY, confronts the collision of
packets from other networks that operate at 2.4GHz.
Furthermore, use of adaptive filtering or spatio-temporal
interference mitigation with MIMO antennas and diversity
combing techniques also encounter CCI successfully [4][6][7].
Also, MIMO allows exploitation of Beamforming and
Transmit Diversity, both being considered very efficient, as
Beamforming through dynamic or fixed incorporations of
radiation patterns, minimize CCI, whereas Transmit Diversity
applies space time encoding with antenna diversity that leads
to co-channel reduction [4][7][8].
In addition, the Multiuser Detection technique combined
with MIMO for ISM bands, mitigates CCI effects and
provides gain, while Spatial Diversity and Space Time
Spreading takes advantage of independent fading from the
positioning of antennas in the longest possible distance
between them, whereas Space Division Multiple Access
(SDMA) distinguish users by detecting the unique spatial
signature of each one, allowing simultaneous support of
multiple users within the same frequency and time [4][9].
Last but not least, as CISCO proposes, a proper positioning
of APs avoids CCI, and particular for WLANs at 2.4 GHz,
CISCO agrees with the popular recommendation of three-
channel setup approach and recommends it, as the most
appropriate for 802.11b/g protocols [10]. However, CISCO
notes that a four channel installation might turn to a tricky and
rather troublesome situation, because as more users are
introduced inside the wireless system, the signal of each
separate device turn to noise, for one another, because more
sideband energy is created, which inevitable leads to poor
performance and lower throughput [10]. Messing up APs
create disputes between them as they constantly to control
frequency, which hurts wireless network’s total performance,
as each AP must wait until others stop transmit, or crank up its
power output in order to drown interference from neighboring
APs and that is the reason for this energy leakage to nearby
channels that create interference noise, as any neighboring
transmitter is vulnerable at his tolerance band around its
channel [10][11]. The phenomenon where interference caused
by neighboring or adjacent transmitters’ energy leaks to
another channel, on distinct frequency channels, is defined as
Adjacent Interference (ACI) [10][11]. When ACI is present,
SINR is reduced, therefore number of errors in the receiver is
highly increased and when used in 802.11 among non-
overlapping channels, ACI becomes a problem. Additionally,
due to space constraints, it is even higher in devices equipped
with multiple 802.11 radios, as distance between antennas is
minimum but as mentioned before, a careful engineering
design increases network’s capacity, using overlapping
channels, but this can be succeeded only by optimal APs
positioning, power transmission check and channel
assignment, that is estimated according to spatial spacing
among radios installed, PHY modulation, RF band selection,
and traffic pattern’s examination. Proper engineering design,
also avoids matters like Hidden and Exposed Terminal, who
correlate to additional ACI and waste of resources [11][12].
All above conclusions, were based on research usually
performed in 802.11b/g protocols, however late 802.11n,
brought up lots of improvements in signal filtering, which
minimizes leakage of energy to adjacent channels, wider
channels use and also less guard carriers which have a positive
effect on channel’s orthogonality [12].

5
In advance, as Andrzej Zankiewicz determines in
“Susceptibility of IEEE 802.11n networks to adjacent-channel
interference in the 2.4GHz ISM band” [13], ACI among
802.11 protocols varies and notice that “IEEE 802.11n
standard are much more susceptible to a foreign transmission
than links which use the older 802.11g or 802.11b standard.”
[13]. As regards to the rest 802.11 protocols and experimental
comparison between them, Zankiewicz’s results showed that
802.11g remained rather unaffected by an adjacent 802.11n
transmission, except when both protocols operated inside the
same channel, where 802.11g throughput got poorer by 75%,
while was unaffected in cases of direct adjacent channel
operation between them [13]. In contrast, Zankiewicz’s
observations in relation to 802.11b/n compare, showed that
802.11b throughput got poorer by 50% in every overlapping
channel use of an adjacent 802.11n link.
Additional, similarly to previous the 802.11g/n comparison,
802.11b was unaffected only when introduced a complete
separation into the channel deployment between operational
links of two protocols, therefore is advised to use a clear
separation and far distance deployment between channels, in
both cases, in order to avoid ACI, due to the fact that even for
802.11n protocol, the vulnerability to ACI, when compared to
older protocols, is even higher in respect to the importance of
signal that is carried through [13].
III. CASE STUDY PRESENTATION
This scenario analyzes coexistence of wireless systems
operate inside a KV, as part of a telecommunications
company’s core network, during repairs or maintenance by
technicians’ crew, through simulation. As any other cabinet of
this model company, this BS (KV) provides connection
services to a perimeter that covers several city blocks, through
copper and fiber cable systems, between last mile connections
from all nearby apartment blocks, and buildings and
company’s core network, in order to provide services such as
phone, xDSL, VoIP, leased lines and other.
Since majority of the last mile connection is copper wired
and still considered as the main transmission medium, it is
vital to have accurate report measurements about important
factors that influence the network’s quality such as humidity
and temperature, in order to step in rapidly, when a problem
occurs that may lead to QoS loss. Furthermore, real time
report is also essential for security factors, such as BS’s status
or clarification of access to different divisions of BS according
to technicians’ access rights, as ensures further security and
reliability in sectors that require exceptional care, like
governmental, military or medical.
IV. CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
In the model scenario, BS is using two separate wireless
systems in order to safeguard its QoS and security criteria.
First wireless system installed is an 802.11g/n AP that
allows technicians to establish a backup wireless data
connection with back-office Helpdesk in cases of emergency,
such as mobile signal loss, device’s failure, battery’s
discharge, technicians’ vehicle theft or any other worst case
scenario that would demand data transmission, back and forth
to Helpdesk, in order to send and receive all necessary
information about incidents took place and continue any
operations left, smoothly. No special criteria required, apart
from decent bandwidth and data rate that allow email, VoIP or
any other similar data exchange between technicians and
Helpdesk, in order to maintain operational job status active
until further assistance is provided. Concerns about range or
bandwidth, considered limited but it is suggested to expect a
future increase in QoS or data rate, therefore selection of
equipment must be made with criteria higher than those
required.
As device example, Terrawave High-Density 2.4/5 GHz
14dBi Patch Antenna is used, designed for indoor and outdoor
applications.
Frequency Range 2400-2500
MHz
5150-5850
MHz
Bandwidth 100 MHz 700 MHz
Gain 14 dBi
Azimuth Beamwidth 35°
Elevation Beamwidth 35°
VSWR ≤2
Nominal Impedance 50 Ohm
Isolation ≥28 dB
Maximum Power 50 W
Tab. 1 TerraWave High-Density Antenna Specifications
As indicated by specifications, this antenna minimizes
channel-to-channel interference and features higher gain,
without sacrificing network performance, due to its 35-degree
beamwidth (Fig. 1) at both frequency bands [14].
Fig. 1 TerraWave High-Density 2.4/5 GHz Antenna
Patterns [14]

6
Future increase in QoS or need for frequency change, is
considered to be adequate for short-future periods, as it
operates in greater, than needed, distance for both bands but
also because it is compatible with major manufacturers like
CISCO, Motorola and others [14]. More sophisticated
solutions, such as LTE Multiband antenna or MIMO, are
rejected, as we do not wish to invest further to a secondary
backup line due to cost restrictions.
BS’s second wireless system is the most important one, as
monitors crucial factors mentioned before, such as humidity,
temperature and light presence inside the cabin, that being
considered top priority as BSs serve thousands of users with
different standards, from minimum best effort to highest QoS
with zero tolerance in network failure. Therefore real time
monitoring is vital for this model company, as allows rapid
response to any situation occurs by creating an alternative
standby task force, that exploits technicians’ constant mobility
throughout the area, providing them this real time monitoring
of all these factors, as they drive with their vehicles by various
BSs that are scattered through any domestic area. Examples
that require rapid response are extreme weather condition such
as periods of heavy rainfall which influence sensitive to
humidity copper wired networks, breach of security which is
detected by the presence of light inside a BS without prior
update through VPN call or PIN input, possible failure or loss
of quality in leased lines service-level agreement (SLA) that
require instant repair and many other occasions where security
and QoS is at risk.
MeshNet Environmental Temperature, Humidity, Light and
Pressure Sensor is used as device example, MN-ENV-THPLR
EDS-1068 (Fig. 2), which provide highly accurate humidity
and temperatures readings, pulse counter, and a discrete input
with user-defined parameters to provide the appropriate
responsiveness & battery life. [15][16]
Fig. 2 MN-ENV-THPLR EDS-1068 [15][16]
Frequency Range 2.405 MHz 2.475 MHz
Bandwidth 100 MHz 700 MHz
Gain 0 dBm
Transmission Range Up to 120m
Humidity Range 0 – 90 %RH
Temperature Range -40 - 85 °C
Light Measurement Range 0 – 65535 Lux
Pressure Range 300 – 1100 hPa /Millibar
Enclosure Dimensions 80x80x21 mm
Tab. 2 MN-ENV-THPLR EDS-1068 Specifications
The EDS-1068 automatically transmits whenever any alarm
occurs and its transmission range (under good conditions) at
120 meter, is considered to be more than adequate, as BSs in
urban environments are located approximately every two or
three domestic blocks. Technicians scattered in the area of
interest, combining Star and Mesh network topology, among
themselves, sensors and DHCP server, enlarge even further
the wireless network with additional transmission routes for
sensor data so every BS is monitored.
Fig. 3 MN-ENV-THPLR EDS-1068 DHCP server [15][16]
In advance, using internal buffer memory, an average sum
of inside-limit rates about humidity, pressure and temperature,
could be stored and transmitted in custom selected periods,
giving technicians and Helpdesk the ability to be informed on
the average daily status through the DCHP server (Fig. 3),
reducing this way the amount of energy used, as less data will
be transmitted [15][16].
Third wireless system is the common Bluetooth, used by
technicians as they communicate with clients or Helpdesk and
Sony’s Smart Bluetooth® Handset SBH52 is used as example
device, which supports Bluetooth 3.0, assuming the average
maximum power output estimated approximately at 1.5mW
(1.76dB) for EDR and HS [17].

7
Fig. 4 Simulink Block Diagram of our BS wireless informative systems interference
V. SIMULATION MODEL ANALYSIS
In this section, a simulation of the case study is presented,
using Simulink, a block diagram environment integrated with
MATLAB® [18]. As base, Adjacent and Co-Channel
Interference model was chosen, presented in examples of
MathWorks libraries, which simulates the effects of ACI and
CCI on a generic PSK modulated signal [19].
Figure 4 exhibits Simulink block diagram, modified to
model’s needs, with necessary changes and updates in order to
adapt to case study.
EDS-1068 wireless sensor, is set as the main wireless
transmitter, creating a 16-PSK modulated signal, applied into
a square root raised cosine filter, in order to produce the
original signal that will be transmitted and interfere with three
transmissions, the antenna of our AP, the Bluetooth Headset
during a call and AWGN noise, all added by the sum block, in
order to produce the final signal that reaches the receiver,
where it would be filtered, down sampled, and demodulated.
Bluetooth’s transmitter’s creates an 8DPSK modulated
signal, as proposed in Bluetooth v2.0+EDR specifications for
3 Mb/s EDR packets, because 8DPSK allow a symbol rate of
three bits per symbol, resulting 3 times as great in the data
rate. It must be pointed that this increase has its tradeoff, as
the 8-DPSK is considered to be more sensitive to noise, when
compared to older modulations [20].
Bluetooth transmission is considered as Interferer 1.
AP’s antenna, uses a 16QAM modulation signal, applied
similarly into a square root raised cosine filter that eventually
will interference with all transmissions in order to observe the
impact to the final signal at the receiver.
AP’s antenna transmission is considered as Interferer 2.
Both interference signals have a modifiable frequency offset
and power gain and can be deactivated by choice, as both are
active by default.

8
VI. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Performing simulation, examine all transmitted signals
separate and its’ interference with AWGN in the receiver.
Initially, using Discrete Time Eye Diagram block, the impact
of coexistence, for each transmission separate, is presented in
the following diagrams.
Fig. 5 - MN-ENV-TH EDS-1068 Sensor Eye Diagram
Fig. 6 – Access Point’s Eye Diagram
Fig. 7 – Bluetooth’s Eye Diagram
Fig. 8 – Received Signal’s Eye Diagram
From Figures 5 to 8, Distortion and Signal-to-Noise Ratio
(SNR) is significantly increased, as well as the impact in the
receiver’s signal. The effect of interference is clearly visible in
the eye diagrams generated, as the final received signal suffers
from multiple reflections and distortion in time, from both
AP’s and Bluetooth’s simultaneous operation.
In order to value further performance of model, additional
presentation of signals’ interference to the spectrum of
frequency follows, using signal diagrams and constellations.
Fig. 9 – Access Point’s transmitted signal
Fig. 10 – Bluetooth transmitted signal
Fig. 11 – Sensor’s final transmitted signal with AWGN
Fig. 12 – Received transmitted signal
Fig. 13 – Received Signal Constellation

9
Figures 9 to 13 represent how interfering signals alter the
initial sensor’s signal, compared to final transmitted signal
with AWGN, with the received one, especially at frequencies
where AP’s and Bluetooth have its greatest power output.
From the received signal constellation, received data are
noticed to be close to ideal constellation locations, therefore
concluding that system is adequate for simultaneous
coexistence of all three wireless systems.
Decreasing frequency offset of both interfering signals,
spectrum analyzers (Figures 14 and 15) show interfering
signals of Bluetooth and AP slowly moving from the adjacent
channel into the frequency band of the original sensor signal
and eventually start causing CCI, introducing some significant
concerns, but not that important to consider our system non
functional.
Fig. 14 – Received transmitted signal with decreased
frequency offset
Fig. 15 – Received transmitted signal with decreased
frequency offset
Fig. 16 – Received Signal Constellation with decreased
frequency offset
For additional performance evaluation, examination of BER
applied, using Error Rate Display block and Bit Error Rate
Analysis Tool (BERTool) [21] in which noticing ACI’s and
CCI’s big impact upon.
Fig. 17 – BER comparison (theoretical & simulated)
BER initially is estimated at 0.1827 and compared to three
theoretical BER plots from AP, Bluetooth and Sensor (Figure
17), it’s obvious that corresponds at the beginning with
theoretical BER values, while afterwards is slightly reduced
but remains constant, as no encoding technique is applied, at a
high rate of ≈ 18%.
VII. CONCLUSION
In the performance evaluation of the case study scenario,
some important ACI and CCI problems are noticed, due to
simultaneous operation of three systems in the same band but
despite the appearance of high BER, from examination of
signal constellation and diagrams and acknowledging the
simultaneous operation of all three wireless systems, as a
worst case scenario, the operational status of the system is
considered to remain active and functional.
Further improvements that will mitigate ACI and CCI, are
channel assignments, a selection of equipment with higher
QoS standards such as coding techniques, lower but more
resistant modulation schemes, supplementary hardware or
software methods and finally an additional power control
through an average estimation of values from sensor’s data
that will be transmitted more periodically, allowing BS’s
wireless reporting systems to be more stable, as less
transmissions are required but also more energy efficient,
having less power consumption.

10
REFERENCES
[1] International Telecommunication Union: Frequently asked questions.
(Updated 2007) [Internet] ITU. Questions of a general nature (G013-14)
<http://www.itu.int/ITU-R/terrestrial/faq/index.html#g013>
[Accessed Novemver 2014].
[2] Dr. Wajih A. Abu-Al-Saud (2010). EE 499: Wireless & Mobile
Communications (082) [Internet] Lecture 3: Frequency Reuse Concepts.,
pp. 3-6
<http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa/EE/wajih/files/EE%20499,%20Lecture%20
03.pdf> [Accessed Novemver 2014].
[3] Jan Mikulka, Stanislav Hanus (2008). «Bluetooth and IEEE 802.11b/g
coexistence simulation» [Internet] Radioengineering, 2008, Vol.17(3),
pp.66-73 <http://www.radioeng.cz/fulltexts/2008/08_03_066_073.pdf>
[Accessed Novemver 2014].
[4] Kihong Kim (2005). «Interference Mitigation in Wireless
Communications» [Internet]. pp. 9-20.
<https://smartech.gatech.edu/bitstream/handle/1853/7647/kim_kihong_2
00512_phd.pdf> [Accessed December 2014].
[5] Ajal.A.Jose. (2013). «Lecture 3.2: Frequency Reuse». EE 499: Wireless
& Mobile Communications (082) [Internet] Federal Institute of Science
and Technology (FISAT) . Volume 3. (part 2), pp. 15-68.
<http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa/EE/wajih/files/EE%20499,%20Lecture%20
03.pdf> [Accessed December 2014].
[6] J.A. Oyedepo, Y.O. Salihu and Adenike Folaponmile (2010).
«Interference Mitigation Techniques in Wireless Cmmunications
Systems». [Internet] Journal of Research in National Development –
Vol. 8 (No.2)
<http://www.transcampus.org/JORINDV8Dec2010/JournalsV8NO2Dec
201041.html> [Accessed December 2014].
[7] Laster, J. D. and Reed, J. H. (1997). «Interference Rejection in Digital
Wireless Communications» [Internet] IEEE Signal Processing
Magazine. Vol. 14, pp. 37-62.
<http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.ezproxy.kingston.ac.uk/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?
arnumber=587051>[Accessed December 2014].
[8] Hongji Xu, Ju Liu. (2004). «Joint beamforming and transmit diversity
for wireless communications» [Internet] Communications, Circuits and
Systems, 2004. ICCCAS 2004. Vol. 1, pp. 195-199.
<http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.ezproxy.kingston.ac.uk/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?
arnumber=1346009> [Accessed December 2014].
[9] ByLajos Hanzo, Byoung-Jo Choi and Fellow IEEE (2007). «Near-
Instantaneously Adaptive HSDPA-Style OFDM Versus MC-CDMA
Transceiversfor WIFI, WIMAX, and Next-Generation Cellular
Systems» [Internet] Proceedings of the IEEE. Vol.95 (No.12) pp. 2377-
2384.
<http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.ezproxy.kingston.ac.uk/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=
&arnumber=4389758> [Accessed December 2014].
[10] CISCO Technical References: Channel Deployment Issues for 2.4-GHz
802.11 WLANs. (2004) [Internet] CISCO
<http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/technology/channel/dep
loyment/guide/Channel.html> [Accessed December 2014].
[11] P F, (2013) “Adjacent channel versus co-channel interference”[Bulletin
Board Message] <http://serverfault.com/questions/471721/adjacent-
channel-versus-co-channel-interference> [Accessed December 2014].
[12] Anatolij Zubow and Robert Sombrutzki (2011). «Reinvestigating
Channel Orthogonality - Adjacent Channel Interference in IEEE 802.11n
Networks». [Internet] pp. 2-11
<http://sar.informatik.hu-berlin.de/research/publications/SAR-PR-2011-
14/aci_80211n_.pdf >[Accessed Novemver 2014].
[13] Andrzej Zankiewicz (2012). «Susceptibility of IEEE 802.11n networks
to adjacent-channel interference in the 2.4GHz ISM band» [Internet]
PRZEGL Ą D ELEKTROTECHNICZNY (Electrical Review, ISSN
0033-2097, R. 88 NR 9b/2012.) pp. 287-288
<http://pe.org.pl/articles/2012/9b/73.pdf> [Accessed Novemver 2014].
[14] TerraWave High-Density 2.4/5 GHz 14 dBiPatch Antenna «Detailed
Product Specification Sheet» (2013) [Internet] VENTEV.
<http://www.terra-
wave.com/pdf/VenTW2.4%205%20GHz%2014%20dBi%20Patch%20A
ntenna.pdf> [Accessed December 2014].
[15] MN-ENV-TH - Temperature / Humidity Sensor «MN-ENV-TH -
Temperature / Humidity Sensor» (2014) [Internet] Embedded Data
Systems. <http://www.embeddeddatasystems.com/MN-ENV-TH--
Temperature-Humidity-Sensor_p_195.html>[Accessed December
2014].
[16] MN-ENV-THPLR EDS-1068 «MeshNet Environmental Sensor
Manual» (2012) [Internet] Embedded Data Systems. <http://www.terra-
wave.com/pdf/VenTW2.4%205%20GHz%2014%20dBi%20Patch%20A
ntenna.pdf >[Accessed December 2014].
[17] Smart Bluetooth® Handset SBH52 «Specifications» (2011-2014)
[Internet] SONY. <http://www.sonymobile.com/global-
en/products/accessories/smart-bluetooth-handset-sbh52/specifications/>
[Accessed December 2014].
[18] Simulink - Simulation and Model-Based Design «Simulink Overview»
(1994-2014) [Internet] MATLAB.
<http://www.mathworks.com/products/simulink/>[Accessed December
2014].
[19] MathWorks Documentation «Adjacent and Co-Channel Interference»
(1994-2014) [Internet] MATLAB.
<http://www.mathworks.com/help/comm/examples/adjacent-and-co-
channel-interference.html > [Accessed December 2014].
[20] Bluetooth ® Enhanced Data Rate (EDR): The Wireless Evolution.
«Application Note» (2006) [Internet] Agilent Technologies. pp. 7-19
<http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-4204EN.pdf>
[Accessed December 2014].
MathWorks Documentation «Bit Error Rate (BER)» (1994-2014)
[Internet] MATLAB . Concepts BER and BERTool.
<http://www.mathworks.com/help/comm/ug/bit-error-rate-
ber.html#bsvziy0> [Accessed December 2014].

Co-channel and adjacent-channel interference evaluation of an outdoor telecommunications cabinet’s (BS) wireless reporting systems

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to Co-channel and adjacent-channel interference evaluation of an outdoor telecommunications cabinet’s (BS) wireless reporting systems

Similar to Co-channel and adjacent-channel interference evaluation of an outdoor telecommunications cabinet’s (BS) wireless reporting systems (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Co-channel and adjacent-channel interference evaluation of an outdoor telecommunications cabinet’s (BS) wireless reporting systems