the 5g infrastructure association imt2020: 5g ppp ... wwrf/meetings/past events... · the 5g...
TRANSCRIPT
The 5G Infrastructure Association
27/10/2018 1
Werner Mohr
Nokia, 5G PPP Evaluation Group Chair
IMT2020: 5G PPP Evaluation Group
activities
• Background of evaluation activities based on ITU-R process
• 5G roadmap, project portfolio and Evaluation Group members
• Radio Interface Technology submissions to ITU-R
• First evaluation results based on available information (examples)• Peak data rate
• Peak spectral efficiency
• Control plane latency
• Conclusions
27/10/2018 2
Outline
Background of evaluation activities based on
ITU-R process
327/10/2018
Usage scenarios for IMT-2020
and beyond (ITU-R)
27/10/2018 4Source: ITU-R: IMT Vision – Framework and overall objectives of the future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond. Recommendation
ITU-R M.2083-0 (09/2015), https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/m/R-REC-M.2083-0-201509-I!!PDF-E.pdf.
Enhancement of key capabilities from
IMT-Advanced to IMT-2020 (ITU-R)
27/10/2018 5Source: ITU-R: IMT Vision – Framework and overall objectives of the future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond. Recommendation
ITU-R M.2083-0 (09/2015), https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/m/R-REC-M.2083-0-201509-I!!PDF-E.pdf.
27/10/2018 6
Schedule for development of IMT-2020 radio
interface recommendation
Source: ITU-R WP 5D: Submission, Evaluation Process and Consensus Building for IMT-2020. 2017.
Step1 and 2
No.27 No.28 No.29 No.30 No.31 No.32 No.33 No.34 No.35
Step 3(0)
(1)
(40 months: #23 - #32)
Step 4
(20 months: #28 - #32)
(16 months: #31 - #34) (2)
Steps 5,6 and 7(3)
Steps 8
(4)(12 months: #33 - #36)
(28 months: #29 - #35)
WP 5D meetings
2016No.36
Steps in radio interface development process:
Step 1: Issuance of the circular letter Step 2: Development of candidate RITs and SRITsStep 3: Submission/Reception of the RIT and SRIT
proposals and acknowledgement of receipt
Step 5: Review and coordination of outside evaluation activitiesStep 6: Review to assess compliance with minimum requirementsStep 7: Consideration of evaluation results, consensus building
and decision
Step 8: Development of radio interface Recommendation(s)
Critical milestones in radio interface development process:(0): Issue an invitation to propose RITs March 2016 (2): Cut off for evaluation report to ITU February 2020
(3): WP 5D decides framework and key June 2020characteristics of IMT-2020 RIT and SRIT
(4): WP 5D completes development of radio October 2020interface specification Recommendations
IMT-2020 2-01
Evaluation of candidate RITs and SRITs by Independent Evaluation Groups
Step 4:
(1): ITU proposed cut off for submission July 2019of candidate RIT and SRIT proposals
No.26No.24 No.25No.23
2017 2018 2019 2020
Evaluation
RIT - Radio Interface TechnologySRIT - Set of Radio Interface Technologies
• Step 4 – Evaluation of candidate
RITs or SRITs by independent
evaluation groups
– 5G Infrastructure Association
registered as Evaluation Group at
ITU-R
– Evaluation guidelines to follow in
ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.Submission]
– Additional evaluation methods
by Evaluation Groups may be
used and shared between
Evaluation Groups
– Coordination between
Evaluation Groups for
comparison and consistency of
results
– Evaluation reports to be sent to
ITU-R Study Group 5 as input for
WP5D and publication
27/10/2018 7Source: ITU-R WP 5D: Submission, Evaluation Process and Consensus Building for IMT-2020. 2017.
Step 1Circular Letter to invite
proposals for radio interface technologies and
evaluations
Step 2
Development of candidate radio interface
technologies
Step 5Review and coordination
of outside evaluation activities
Step 6Review to assess compliance with
minimum requirements
Step 7Consideration of
evaluation results, consensus building, and
decision
Descriptions of proposed radio interface technologies and evaluation reports
Step 8Development of radio
interface Recommendation(s)
Radio interface specifications (SPECS), sufficiently detailed to enable worldwide compatibility
Step 9Implementation of
Recommendation(s)
Step 4Evaluation of candidate
radio interface technologies by independent evaluation
groups, grouping of the technologies through consensus building
Coordination between independent evaluation groups
Step 3Submission/Reception of
the RIT and SRIT proposals and acknowledgement of
receipt
IMT-2020 2-02
ITU-R Outside ITU-R
IMT-2020 terrestrial component radio
interface development process
• ITU-R report provides
detailed guidelines on
evaluation methodology
and procedures
– System simulation
procedures
– Analytical approach
– Inspection approach
– Usage scenarios
– Test environments
– Network layout
– Evaluation
configurations including
detailed parameter
settings
– Antenna characteristics
– Channel models for IMT-
2020 for system and link
level simulations
27/10/2018 8
Detailed ITU-R report of evaluation
guidelines
Source: ITU-R WP 5D: Guidelines for evaluation of radio interface technologies for IMT-2020. Report ITU-R M.24.12-0, 11/2017.
Characteristic for evaluationHigh-level assessment
method
Evaluation
methodology in this
report
Related section of Reports
ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ]
and ITU-R
M.[IMT-2020.SUBMISSION]
Peak data rate Analytical § 7.2.2Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.1
Peak spectral efficiency Analytical § 7.2.1Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.2
User experienced data rate
Analytical for single band
and single layer;
Simulation for multi-
layer
§ 7.2.3Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.3
5th percentile user spectral
efficiencySimulation § 7.1.2
Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.4
Average spectral efficiency Simulation § 7.1.1Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.5
Area traffic capacity Analytical § 7.2.4Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.6
User plane latency Analytical § 7.2.6Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.7.1
Control plane latency Analytical § 7.2.5Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.7.2
Connection density Simulation § 7.1.3Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.8
Energy efficiency Inspection § 7.3.2Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.9
Reliability Simulation § 7.1.5Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.10
Mobility Simulation § 7.1.4Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.11
Mobility interruption time Analytical § 7.2.7Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.12
Bandwidth Inspection § 7.3.1Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH
PERF REQ], § 4.13
Support of wide range of
servicesInspection § 7.3.3
Report ITU-R M.[IMT-
2020.SUBMISSION], § 3.1
Supported spectrum
band(s)/range(s)Inspection § 7.3.4
Report ITU-R M.[IMT-
2020.SUBMISSION], § 3.2
Today’s available ITU-R documents
Status ITU-R WP5D, November 2017
927/10/2018
• Minimum requirements related to technical performance
for IMT-2020 radio interface(s)
• Requirements, evaluation criteria and submission templates
for the development of IMT-2020
• Guidelines for evaluation of radio interface technologies for IMT-
2020
Source: ITU-R WP5D, October 2017.
Microsoft Word
Document
Microsoft Word
Document
Microsoft Word
Document
Evaluation characteristics
Details and relations
1027/10/2018Source: 5G PPP IMT-2020 Evaluation Group.
Evaluation characteristics Evaluation means Band cases Usage scenario(s) Radio environment Uplink Downlink Network load Mobility Remarks
1. Peak data rate Analytical Single band eMBB n.a. yes yes n.a. n.a. Input from calculation in No. 2
Aggregated bands eMBB n.a. yes yes n.a. n.a. Input from calculation in No. 2
2. Peak spectral efficiency Analytical eMBB n.a. yes yes n.a. n.a. Input to No. 1
3. User experienced data rate Analytical for
single band and
single layer
Single band eMBB Dense urban yes yes n.a. n.a. Input from simulations in No. 4
Simulation for
multi-layer
Aggregated bands eMBB Dense urban yes yes n.a. n.a. Input from simulations in No. 4
4. 5th percentile user spectral efficiency Simulation n.a. eMBB Indoor Hotspot yes yes n.a. n.a. Input to No. 3/5, input from No. 14
n.a. eMBB Dense Urban yes yes n.a. n.a. Input to No. 3/5, input from No. 14
n.a. eMBB Rural yes yes n.a. n.a. Input to No. 3/5, input from No. 14
5. Average spectral efficiency Simulation n.a. eMBB Indoor Hotspot yes yes n.a. n.a. Input from simulations in No. 4, 14
n.a. eMBB Dense Urban yes yes n.a. n.a. Input from simulations in No. 4, 14
n.a. eMBB Rural yes yes n.a. n.a. Input from simulations in No. 4, 14
6. Area traffic capacity Analytical Single band eMBB Indoor Hotspot yes yes n.a. n.a. Input from simulations in No. 5, 14
Aggregated bands eMBB Indoor Hotspot yes yes n.a. n.a. Input from simulations in No. 5, 14
7. User plane latency Analytical n.a. eMBB n.a. yes yes n.a. n.a. n.a.
n.a. URLLC n.a. yes yes n.a. n.a. n.a.
8. Control plane latency Analytical n.a. eMBB n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
n.a. URLLC n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
9. Connection density Simulation n.a. MTC n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
10. Energy efficiency Inspection n.a. eMBB n.a. n.a. n.a. loaded case n.a. Input from simulations in No. 5
n.a. eMBB n.a. n.a. n.a. no load n.a. n.a.
11. Reliability Simulation n.a. URLLC Urban Marco n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
12. Mobility Simulation n.a. eMBB Indoor Hotspot yes n.a. n.a. Stationary Input from No. 14
n.a. eMBB Indoor Hotspot yes n.a. n.a. Pedestrian Input from No. 14
n.a. eMBB Dense Urban yes n.a. n.a. Stationary Input from No. 14
n.a. eMBB Dense Urban yes n.a. n.a. Pedestrian Input from No. 14
n.a. eMBB Dense Urban yes n.a. n.a. Vehicular Input from No. 14
n.a. eMBB Rural yes n.a. n.a. Pedestrian Input from No. 14
n.a. eMBB Rural yes n.a. n.a. Vehicular Input from No. 14
n.a. eMBB Rural yes n.a. n.a. High speed vehicular Input from No. 14
13. Mobility interruption time Analytical n.a. eMBB n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
n.a. URLLC n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
14. Bandwidth Inspection n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
15. Support of wide range of services Inspection n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
16. Supported spectrum band(s) / range(s) Inspection n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Registered IMT-2020 Evaluation Groups
Status: December 2017
1127/10/2018Source: ITU-R. http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-R/study-groups/rsg5/rwp5d/imt-2020/Pages/submission-eval.aspx.
• 5G Infrastructure Association - 5G PPP web site Europe
• ATIS WTSC IMT-2020 Evaluation Group - WTSC web site USA
• ChEG Chinese EvaluaHon Group - ChEG web site China
• Canadian Evaluation Group - CEG web site Canada
• Wireless World Research Forum - WWRF web site Global
• Telecom Centres of Excellence, India - TCOE web site India
• The Fifth Generation Mobile Communications Promotion Forum, Japan - 5GMF
web site Japan
• TTA 5G Technology Evaluation Special Project Group - TTA SPG33 web site Korea
• Trans-Pacific Evaluation Group - TPCEG web site USA – Taiwan
• ETSI Evaluation Group - ETSI web site Europe
• Egyptian Evaluation Group Africa
5G roadmap, project portfolio and Evaluation
Group members
1227/10/2018
13
5G PPP Vision and Requirements
5G roadmap
Source: 5G Infrastructure Association: 5G Empowering vertical industries White Paper, February 2016.27/10/2018
27/10/2018 14
Horizon 2020 5G PPP
Call 1 selected projects – 07.2015 – 06.2017 (06.2018)
Source: 5G PPP, https://5g-ppp.eu/5g-ppp-phase-1-projects/.
Euro-5G5G PPP Coordination
and Support Action
CHARISMAConverged Heterogeneous Advanced
5G Cloud-RAN Architecture for
Intelligent and Secure Media Access
5G EnsureSecurity
(Will be added later)
Security
5GEx5G Exchange
CogNetBuilding an Intelligent System of
Insights and Action for 5G Network
Management
SELFNETFramework for SELF-organized network
management in virtualized and
software defined NETworks
Network automation
5G-XhaulDynamically Reconfigurable Optical-Wireless
Backhaul/Fronthaul with Cognitive Control
Plane for Small Cells and Cloud-RANs
5G-CrosshaulThe 5G Integrated fronthaul/backhaul
Fronthaul/Backhaul
VirtuWindVirtual and programmable
industrial network prototype
deployed in operational Wind park
SONATAService Programming and
Orchestration for Virtualized
Software Networks
SUPERFLUIDITYSuperfluidity: a
super-fluid, cloud-native, converged
edge system
SESAMESmall cEllS coordinAtion for
Multi-tenancy and Edge services
SDN, NFV, Cloud andVirtualisation
5G-Norma5G NOvel Radio Multiservice
adaptive network ArchitectureMETIS-IIMobile and wireless communications
Enablers for Twenty-twenty (2020)
Information Society-II
COHERENTCoordinated control and spectrum
management for 5G heterogeneous
radio access networks
SPEED-5Gquality of Service Provision and capacity
Expansion through Extended-DSA for 5G
mmMAGICMillimetre-Wave Based Mobile Radio Access Network
for Fifth Generation Integrated Communications
Radio-related cluster
FANTASTIC-5GFlexible Air iNTerfAce for Scalable service delivery
wiThin wIreless Communication networks of the 5th
Generation
Flex5GwareFlexible and
efficient
hardware/softwar
e platforms for 5G
network elements
and devices
Hardware implementation
27/10/2018 15
Horizon 2020 5G PPP
Call 2 selected projects – 06.2017 – 11.2019 (08.2020)
Source: 5G PPP, https://5g-ppp.eu/5g-ppp-phase-2-projects/.
Members of the 5G PPP IMT-2020
Evaluation Group
1627/10/2018
• Supporting 5G PPP projects• Phase II
• One5G
• 5G Essence
• 5G MoNAarch
• 5G Xcast
• To-Euro-5G CSA
• Phase III• 5G VINNI
• Supporting 5G Infrastructure Association Members• Huawei
• Nokia
• Telenor
• Turkcell
Source: 5G PPP IMT-2020 Evaluation Group.
Radio Interface Technology submissions to
ITU-R
1727/10/2018
Submissions of Radio Interface Technologies
(RTIs), July 2018
1827/10/2018
• RIT submissions to ITU-R
• 3GPP:• Initial submission in February 2018
• Update of proposal in October 2018
• Final submission in July 2019
• China:• Initial submission in February 2018 based on 3GPP Release 15
• Korea:• Initial submission in February 2018
• Deviations from 3GPP Release 15
• Based on trial specification for Winter Olympic Games in Korea
• ETSI DECT:• Initial submission in July 2018
• Different approach than 3GPP
• TSDSI:• Initial submission in July 2018
• Basically the same approach as 3GPP Release 15
• 5G PPP Evaluation Group is focussing on 3GPP submission
Source: 5G Infrastructure Association.
27/10/2018 19
3GPP time schedule on IMT-2020 radio
interface submissions
Source: 3GPP.
IMT2020 submission - timeplan
First evaluation characteristics based on
available information
2027/10/2018
First evaluation characteristics based on
available information
2127/10/2018
• First evaluation characteristics done or initial considerations based on
available information from initial submission• Peak data rate (final)
• Following slides
• Peak spectral efficiency (final)
• Following slides
• Control plane latency (first considerations)
• Following slides
• Bandwidth (final, Evaluation Report Section III.14)
• Supported bandwidths meet requirements
• Support of wide range of services (first considerations, Evaluation Report Section III.15)
• Supported spectrum band(s)/range(s) (final, Evaluation Report Section III.16)
• Supported spectrum bands meet requirements
• Calibration of simulators ongoing
• Necessary information on other characteristics expected in submission
to ITU-R in October 2018
Source: 5G PPP IMT-2020 Evaluation Group.
Jose Luis Carcel, Manuel FuentesUniversitat Politecnica de Valencia (UPV).
5G New RadioIMT-2020 Evaluation: Peak data rate and peak spectral efficiency calculation
23
Peak data rate formula [Analysis]
• Calculated as:
� �: Number of aggregated component carriers (CC) in a frequency band. Values from 1 up to 16.
� ����: Scaling factor related to the proportion of resources used in DL/UL transmissions.
� FDD DL and UL: �� � 1.� TDD DL and UL: �� depends on the frame structure and the Slot Format Indicator (SFI).
Example TDD DL:- Frame structure: DDDSUDDDSU (D: Downlink, U: Uplink, S: Mixed Downlink and Uplink).- Slot structure for Mixed Frames:
» SFI = 31: 11 OFDM symbols (DL), 2 OFDM symbols (UL), 1 OFDM symbol (GP).
- ���� :
» 6 out of 10 frames are fully dedicated to DL. ��� � 0.6» 2 out of 10 frames are partially dedicated to DL. 12 out of 14 OFDM symbols per slot. ��� � �
�� ·���� � 0.1714
» ���� � ���+���� 0.7714� �: Number of layers when multiple antennas are used. DL values from 1 up to 8. UL values from 1 up to 4.
� ��: Maximum modulation order (�� � 8�.� �� !: Maximum CR ("�#$ � 0.925�.� (���: Scaling factor used to reflect the capability mismatch between baseband and RF capability for both Standalone UE and Non-
Standalone UE. Values: 1 or 0.75.
� µ: Numerology. Integer values from 0 up to 4.
� )*+: Total OFDM symbol duration in seconds. Depends on numerology and the CP type.
� ,-�../ : Maximum RB allocation in the available BW. It is multiplied by 12 to obtain the number of REs.
� 01 � : Overhead introduced by physical channels and signals.
Peak data rate
23 �4 · 5�#6789 · �� · : · "�#$ ·;<=>>? ,A · 12
B9A· 1 C DE
F
G�
24
Peak data rate formula [Analysis]
• Calculated as:
Peak data rate
23 �4 · 5�#6789 · �� · : · "�#$ ·;<=>>? ,A · 12
B9A· 1 C DE
F
G�
,-�../ � ./H((IJI K LM
Frequency range Numerology (µ) SCS(kHz)Maximum BW (MHz)
EffectiveBW (MHz) ,-�../
FR1(450 MHz - 6 GHz)
0 15 50 48.6 2701 30 100 98.28 2732 60 100 97.2 135
FR2(24.25 GHz - 52.6
GHz)
2 60 200 190.08 264
3 120 400 380.16 264
1 The impact of the frequency guard bands on the available bandwidth is considered for the ,-�../ calculation.
25
Peak data rate formula [Analysis]
Peak data rate
• Overhead (DE��)� Specifies the ratio of REs occupied by L1/L2 control, synchronization signals, reference signals
and guard bands with respect to the total number of REs available for the effective bandwidthin a 5G NR frame (time interval of 10 ms).
� Overhead can be calculated for DL and UL transmissions:
Downlink Uplink
� Depending on the transmission mode, different OH values and peak data rates are obtained:� DE��,N�� and peak data rate for FDD DL.
� DE��,O�� and peak data rate for TDD DL.
� DEP�,N�� and peak data rate for FDD UL.
� DEP�,O�� and peak data rate for TDD UL.
DEP� �DE<=QRS T DE<PRRS T DE<PURS
BVWXY"Z[\]DE�� �DEUU <⁄ >RS T DE<�RRS T DE<�URS T DE_<
BVWXY"Z[`]
26
FDD DL: Peak data rate [Analysis]
• Calculated as: Example:
� a: Number of component carriers (CC) in a frequency band. 16
� ��:Scaling factor for the proportion of resources used in FDD DL. 0.7714
� �:Number of layers when multiple antennas are used in DL. 8
� :��: Scaling for the capability mismatch between baseband and RF. 1
� �� is the maximum modulation order. 8
� "�#$ is the maximum CR. 0.925
� µ is the numerology. 0
� B9 is the total OFDM symbol duration in seconds (Normal CP). 71.37 µs
� ;<=>>? is the maximum RB allocation in the effective BW. 270
� OH is the overhead. 0.1044
Peak data rate
23 �4 1 · 8 · 8 · 1 · 0.925 · 270 · 1271.37 · 10cd 1 C 0.1044 � 38.51efg[
�d
G�
27
FDD DL: Peak data rate [Analysis]
• Extrapolation to all configurations (Gbps) through two possible approaches:
� 1. Maximum peak data rate for the maximum number of component carriers (CC=16).
� 2. Maximum peak data rate for the minimum number of CC that fulfils the IMT-2020 requirement.
Peak data rate
Freq. Band
NumerologyBandwidth
(MHz)hi
SISO
hiMIMO
Number of CC
hiSISO + CA
hiMIMO + CA
FR10 50 0.30 2.40 16 4.81 38.511 100 0.60 4.87 16 9.74 77.992 100 0.59 4.78 16 9.57 76.59
IMT-2020 Required Value DL: 20 Gbps
Freq. Band
NumerologyBandwidth
(MHz)hi
SISO
hiMIMO
Number of CC
hiSISO + CA
hiMIMO + CA
FR10 50 0.30 2.40 9 2.70 21.661 100 0.60 4.87 5 3.04 24.372 100 0.59 4.78 5 2.99 23.93
CA: Carrier aggregationCC: Component Carriers
28
TDD DL: Peak data rate [Analysis] (SFI 31)
• Calculated as: Example:
� a: Number of component carriers (CC) in a frequency band. 16
� ��:Scaling factor for the proportion of resources used in TDD DL1 0.7714
� �:Number of layers when multiple antennas are used in DL. 8
� :��: Scaling for the capability mismatch between baseband and RF. 1
� �� is the maximum modulation order. 8
� "�#$ is the maximum CR. 0.925
� µ is the numerology. 0
� B9 is the total OFDM symbol duration in seconds (Normal CP). 71.37 µs
� ;<=>>? is the maximum RB allocation in the effective BW. 270
� OH is the overhead. 0.1284
Peak data rate
23 �4 0.77 · 8 · 8 · 1 · 0.925 · 270 · 1271.37 · 10cd 1 C 0.128 � 28.9efg[
�d
G�
1 Frame structure: DDDMUDDDMU, M frames with SFI: 31
29
TDD DL: Peak data rate [Analysis] (SFI 31)
• Extrapolation to all configurations (Gbps) through two possible approaches:
� Maximum peak data rate for the maximum number of component carriers (CC=16).
� Maximum peak data rate for the minimum number of CC that fulfil the IMT-2020 requirement.
Peak data rate
Freq. Band
NumerologyBandwidth
(MHz)hi
SISO
hiMIMO
Number of CC
hiSISO + CA
hiMIMO + CA
FR10 50 0.22 1.80 16 3.61 28.911 100 0.45 3.66 16 7.32 58.562 100 0.44 3.59 16 7.19 57.52
FR22 200 0.82 6.59 16 13.19 105.563 400 1.65 13.25 16 26.51 212.09
IMT-2020 Required Value DL: 20 Gbps
Freq. Band
NumerologyBandwidth
(MHz)hi
SISO
hiMIMO
Number of CC
hiSISO + CA
hiMIMO + CA
FR10 50 0.22 1.80 12 2.71 21.681 100 0.45 3.66 6 2.74 21.962 100 0.44 3.59 6 2.69 21.57
FR22 200 0.82 6.59 4 3.29 26.393 400 1.65 13.25 2 3.31 26.51
CA: Carrier aggregationCC: Component Carriers
30
FDD UL: Peak data rate [Analysis]
• Calculated as: Example:
� a: Number of component carriers (CC) in a frequency band. 16
� ��: scaling factor for the proportion of resources used in FDD UL 1
� �:Number of layers when multiple antennas are used in UL. 4
� :��: Scaling for the capability mismatch between baseband and RF. 1
� �� is the maximum modulation order. 8
� "�#$ is the maximum CR: 0.925
� µ is the numerology. 0
� B9 is the total OFDM symbol duration in seconds (Normal CP). 71.37 µs
� ;<=>>? is the maximum RB allocation in the effective BW. 270
� OH is the overhead. 0.0782
Peak data rate
23 �4 1 · 4 · 8 · 1 · 0.925 · 270 · 1271.37 · 10cd 1 C 0.0782 � 19.81efg[
�d
G�
31
FDD UL: Peak data rate [Analysis]
• Extrapolation to all configurations (Gbps) through two possible approaches:
� Maximum peak data rate for the maximum number of CC.
� Maximum peak data rate for the minimum number of CC that fulfil the IMT-2020 requirement.
Peak data rate
Freq. Band
Numerologyhi
SISO
hiMIMO
Number of CC
hiSISO + CA
hiMIMO + CA
FR10 0.30 1.23 16 4.95 19.811 0.62 2.51 16 10.05 40.222 0.61 2.47 16 9.88 39.55
IMT-2020 Required Value UL: 10 Gbps
Freq. Band
Numerologyhi
SISO
hiMIMO
Number of CC
hiSISO + CA
hiMIMO + CA
FR10 0.30 1.23 9 2.78 11.141 0.62 2.51 4 2.51 10.052 0.61 2.47 5 3.09 12.36
CA: Carrier aggregationCC: Component Carriers
32
TDD UL: Peak data rate [Analysis] (SFI 31)
• Calculated as: Example:
� a: Number of component carriers (CC) in a frequency band. 16
� ��: scaling factor for the proportion of resources used in TDD UL1 0.6286
� υ is the number of layers when multiple antennas are used. 4
� :��: scaling for the capability mismatch between baseband and RF. 1
� �� is the maximum modulation order 8
� "�#$ is the maximum CR: 0.925
� µ is the numerology 0
� B9 is the OFDM symbol duration in seconds (Normal CP) 71.37 µs
� ;<=>>? is the maximum RB allocation in the whole BW 270
� OH is the overhead 0.1003
Peak data rate
23 �4 0.62 · 4 · 8 · 1 · 0.925 · 270 · 1271.37 · 10cd · 1 C 0.10 � 12.16efg[
�d
G�
1 Frame structure: UUUMDUUUMD, M frames with SFI: 31
33
TDD UL: Peak data rate [Analysis] (SFI 31)
• Extrapolation to all configurations (Gbps) through two possible approaches:
� Maximum peak data rate for the maximum number of CC.
� Maximum peak data rate for the minimum number of CC that fulfil the IMT-2020 requirement.
Peak data rate
Freq. Band Numerologyhi
SISO
hiMIMO
Number of CChi
SISO + CA
hiMIMO + CA
FR10 0.19 0.76 14 2.66 10.631 0.38 1.54 7 2.70 10.812 0.38 1.52 7 2.66 10.67
FR22 0.74 2.96 4 2.96 11.853 1.48 5.94 2 2.97 11.88
IMT-2020 Required Value UL: 10 Gbps
Freq. Band Numerologyhi
SISO
hiMIMO
Number of CChi
SISO + CA
hiMIMO + CA
FR10 0.19 0.76 16 3.04 12.161 0.38 1.54 16 6.17 24.712 0.38 1.52 16 6.10 24.40
FR22 0.74 2.96 16 11.85 47.433 1.48 5.94 16 23.76 95.05
CA: Carrier aggregationCC: Component Carriers
34
Peak spectral efficiency (DL) [Analysis]
• Calculated as the peak data rate normalized by carrier bandwidth (including frequency guard bands):
• FDD DL = 1, TDD DL: 0.7714.
• Maximum BW is considered for each numerology and FR.
• FDD DL TDD DL
Peak data rate
Frequency Band
Numerologyji (bit/s/Hz)
SISO
ji (bit/s/Hz)
MIMO
FR10 6.01 48.131 6.09 48.742 5.98 47.87
k3 �23
· lm
Frequency Band
Numerologyji (bit/s/Hz)
SISO
ji (bit/s/Hz)
MIMO
FR10 5.97 46.841 5.93 47.442 5.98 46.60
FR22 5.34 42.763 5.37 42.96
IMT-2020 Required Value DL: 30 bits/s/Hz
35
Peak spectral efficiency (UL) [Analysis]
• Calculated as the peak data rate normalized by carrier bandwidth (including frequency guard bands):
• FDD UL = 1, TDD UL = 0.6286.
• Maximum BW is considered for each numerology and FR.
• FDD UL TDD UL
Peak spectral efficiency
k3 �23
· lm
Frequency Band
Numerologyji (bit/s/Hz)
SISO
ji (bit/s/Hz)
MIMO
FR10 6.19 24.761 6.28 25.142 6.17 24.71
IMT-2020 Required Value UL: 15 bits/s/Hz
Frequency Band
Numerologyji (bit/s/Hz)
SISO
ji (bit/s/Hz)
MIMO
FR10 6.04 24.171 6.14 24.572 6.06 24.26
FR22 5.89 23.573 5.90 23.62
5G NR FDD Control plane latency
Ole Grøndalen
Telenor
ITU-R M.2410:
• Control plane latency refers to the transition time from a most
“battery efficient” state (e.g. Idle state) to the start of
continuous data transfer (e.g. Active state).
• This requirement is defined for the purpose of evaluation in
the eMBB and URLLC usage scenarios.
• The minimum requirement for control plane latency is 20 ms.
Proponents are encouraged to consider lower control plane
latency, e.g. 10 ms.
Considerations for 5G NR
• For 5G NR “a most battery efficient state” can mean the
RRC_INACTIVE as well as RRC_IDLE state.
• It will therefore be reasonable to do the latency calculations
starting with the UE in the RRC_INACTIVE state.
• The control plane latency will then be determined by the
duration of the RRC Connection Resume procedure.
Transition time calculation
UE gNB
Random Access Preamble
Random Access Response
RRCConnectionResumeRequest
RRCConnectionResume
Latency assumptions
Worst-case delay due to RACH scheduling period: 1 TTI
Transmission of RACH Preamble: 1 TTI
Preamble detection and processing in gNB: 1 ms
Transmission of Random Access Response: 1 TTI
UE Processing Delay (decoding of scheduling grant, timing alignment and C-RNTI
assignment + L1 encoding of RRC Connection Request) : 1 ms
Transmission of RRC Connection Resume Request: 1 TTI
RRCConnectionResumeComplete
Processing delay in gNB (L2 and RRC): 3 ms
Transmission of RRC Connection Resume (and UL grant): 1 TTI
Processing delay in the UE (L2 and RRC): 3 ms
Transmission of RRC Connection Resume Complete : 1 TTI
The UE and gNB processing delays dominate.
Values used are based on those proposed in R2-1812009 and R2-1812253
Numerical examples
Δf 15 kHz 60 kHz 240 kHz
#OFDM symbols
per TTI
14 7 2 14 7 2 14 7 2
TTI [ms] 1 0.5 0.143 0.25 0.125 0.0357 0.0625 0.0312 0.00893
CP latency [ms] 14 11 8.86 9.5 8.75 8.21 8.38 8.19 8.05
• With the UE and gNB processing delay assumptions given, the
20 ms control plane latency requirement is satisfied in all cases.
• The results are only indicative until the UE and gNB processing
delays are specified in TS 38.331.
Conclusions
4127/10/2018
Conclusion
4227/10/2018
• Evaluation requires substantial technical work for• analytic evaluation• simulations and• inspection
• 5G PPP is supporting independent evaluation by several projects and members of 5G Infrastructure Association
• First evaluation characteristics investigated based on available information
• Focus on 3GPP submission to ITU-R
• ITU-R requirements met for• Peak data rate• Peak spectral efficiency• Bandwidth• Supported spectrum band(s)/range(s) meet
• Simulations under preparation• Several characteristics require additional information from SDOs
Source: 5G Infrastructure Association.
27/10/2018 43
Thank you for your
attention!
http://5g-ppp.eu