Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Overcoming Self-Interference in SM-OFDMA with ESINR and Dynamic Subcarrier Allocation


Published on

R. Nordin, S. Armour, J.P. McGeehan, “Overcoming Self-Interference in SM-OFDMA with ESINR and Dynamic Subcarrier Allocation”, Proceedings of IEEE 69th Vehicular Technology Conference, 2009. VTC Spring 2009, pp. 1-5, Apr. 2009

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Overcoming Self-Interference in SM-OFDMA with ESINR and Dynamic Subcarrier Allocation

  1. 1. Overcoming Self- Interference in SM-OFDMAVehicular Technology Society with ESINR and Dynamic Subcarrier Allocation Rosdiadee Nordin, Dr. Simon Armour and Prof. Joe McGeehan Centre for Communications Research Laboratory, University of Bristol INTRODUCTION 5. SIMULATION PARAMETERS  Combined benefits of MIMO architecture and OFDM(A) technology make it an  Using a 2 × 2 SM-OFDMA system, with 64 QAM, ¾ rate modulation attractive technology for future wireless communications, such as 3GPP LTE, scheme in an uncorrelated Rayleigh fading channel environment. WiMAX (802.16) and MBWA (802.20).  Adopted ETSI-BRAN Channel Model ‘E’, which simulates typical large open  However, MIMO suffers from severe impairment effects due to Co-channel space outdoor environments for NLOS conditions, with excess delay spread interference (CCI), also known as self-interference, inherent in the MIMO of 1760ns, sampling period of 10ns and RMS delay spread of 250ns. architecture.  This research aims to minimized the CCI effect in the MIMO-SM scheme by  Simulated for 16 MS users and Operating frequency 5 GHz exploiting the knowledge of the channel gain and combine it with Dynamic each MS is allocated a single sub- Bandwidth 100 MHz Subcarrier Allocation (DSA). channel consisting 48 useable FFT Size 1024 Useful Subcarriers 768 subcarriers. Subcarrier spacing 97.656 KHz 10.24 s  2000 independent identically Useful symbol duration2. OBJECTIVES distributed (i.i.d.) quasi-static Total symbol duration 12.00 s Punctured ½ rate convolution code, Channel Coding  Utilise the multi-user channel to mitigate channel fading and exploit it as a source random channels samples per constraint length 7, {133, 171}octal of diversity. user.  Consider the interference that exists between the spatial sub-channels. 6. RESULTS& ANALYSIS  Provide fair benefit across all users. Probability(Normalised perceived ESINR metric > abscissa 1 Channel Gain 0.9 ESINR 0.8 Random  From the CCDF comparison, DSA-ESINR3. SYSTEM MODEL metric outperforms the random allocation 0.7 0.6 strategies by up to 7 dB. H1 Transmitter at X1 X1 With index 1 Tx1 channel 1 Rx1 0.5  DSA-channel gain has slightly lower gain; Base Station X1 OFDM H3 channel 3 0.4 approximately 2 dB compared to DSA using User k Input With index 2 H2 0.3 the ESINR metric. Data Scrambling/ FEC/ Symbol Serial to Parallel& DSA channel 2 0.2 Puncturing/ Interleaving Mapping Spatial Multiplexing mapping X2 Tx2 X1X2 With index 3 0.1 H4 Rx2 X2 X2 OFDM channel 4 0 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 15 With index 4 Normalised perceived ESINR metric (dB) Index 1 2 3 4 10 ESINR from DSA Index 4  DSA-ESINR have consistent high ESINR 5 Normalised ESINR metric (dB) Index 3 other users Scheme Index 2 metric compare to DSA-channel gain. 0 Index 1 -5  This shows that DSA-channel gain does ESINR1 ESINR2 -10 not consider the effect of self- G2 interference (and its impact upon system -15 ESINR G1 capacity and BER) for the selected -20 Receiver at calculation G2 DSA Mobile Station k MMSE info. G1DSA subcarriers. -25 Channel Gain -30 DSA S1 Y1 DSA OFDM DSA-ESINR Deinterleaving/ S1 S2 Parallel to MMSE Demapping -35 User k Symbol 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Depuncturing/ Viterbi Serial& De- Linear 0 Output Data Demapping Y2 10 Subcarrier index Decoding/ Descrambling Multiplexing S2 Detection DSA Random Demapping OFDM 10 -1 Channel Gain ESINR  DSA-ESINR has better BER performance than DSA-channel gain by 4 dB (at 10-5 BER). 4. METHODOLOGY 10 -2  This implied that DSA-ESINR has the benefit of minimizing the effect of self- BER -3 10 Allocation strategy interference, resulting in improvement of 10 -4 BER. ESINR metric has the knowledge of self- DSA allows user with the lowest ESINR to 10 -5 interference from the other transmitted have the ‘best’ ESINR that is available for the -6 4 Channel Gain ESINR 10 data stream within the same channel. next transmission. Random Average (dB) 0 5 10 15 20 25 2 SNR(dB) 0 -2 (1) Initialization  DSA using the ESINR metric has the -4 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 smallest variance and the largest average User number Set ESINRk,m’=0 for all users, k=1…K; Set allocated subcarrier index, channel response, compared to other 15 Channel Gain Ck,s,m’=0 for all users, whereby s is the allocated subcarriers and types of allocation algorithm. ESINR Random 10 spatial sub-channels, m’={1,2,M’}; Set s=1 Variance  It shows that the proposed algorithm 5 (2) Main Process offers fairness whilst maximizing the 0 While Nm’≠0Nsub= average channel gain of any given user 2 4 6 8 User number 10 12 14 16 { (a) Sort users, start with users with less ESINR metric. Find user without minimizing it in the other users. Algorithm ESINR Channel gain Random k satisfying: Mean (dB) 1.815 1.658 -1.336 ESINRk,m’ ≤ ESINRi,m’, for all i, 1≤i≤ K Variance 0.6061 1.882 4.972 (b) For the user k in (a), find subcarrier n satisfying: 9 ESINR-DSA Gk,m’ ≥ Gj,m’, for all j N 8 ESINR-Random ESNR-DSA (c) Update ESINRk,m’, N and Ck,s,m’ with the n from (b) according to 7 ESNR-Random Capacity bound  Average data rate performance for both the ESINRk,m’ = ESINRk,m’+ Gk,m’ ESINR and ESNR systems increases at Throughput (bps/Hz) 6 approximately twice the capacity of random Nm’=Nm’-n 5 subcarrier allocation. Ck,s,m’=n 4  The proposed algorithm is able to achieve s=s+1 3 the desired balance between fairness and (d) Go the next user in the short list define in (a), until all 2 system capacity. users are allocated another best subcarrier, Nm’=0 1 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 } Eb/N0 (dB) 7. CONCLUSIONS  Initial investigation has revealed that the next generation of wireless system would be capable of improving the capacity performance while providing fair gain and improved BER performance.  The proposed algorithm considers co-antenna interference within a SM-OFDMA system.  Future work will focus on investigating BER and capacity performance of the system in correlated channels where the effect of self- interference is more dominant. Based on the initial results, the proposed algorithm can be expected to provide even greater benefits.ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Travel grant for this conference is funded by University of Bristol’s Alumni Foundation, whose financial support is gratefully acknowledged.