Ali Sadri, PhD Sr. Director Intel Corporation Past and Future - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
ali sadri phd sr director intel corporation past and
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Ali Sadri, PhD Sr. Director Intel Corporation Past and Future - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 08, 2024 142 likes •384 views

Ali Sadri, PhD Sr. Director Intel Corporation Past and Future Capacity Improvement Air Interference Mitigation, Full Duplex Air New Waveform, MU-MIMO Interface Beamforming, etc Interface Available Available Licensed, Unlicensed, Shared

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Ali Sadri, PhD

  • Sr. Director

Intel Corporation

slide-2
SLIDE 2

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

2

Past and Future Capacity Improvement

Air Interface

Available Spectrum Small Cell

Air Interface

Available Spectrum Small Cell

Interference Mitigation, Full Duplex New Waveform, MU-MIMO Beamforming, etc Licensed, Unlicensed, Shared mmWave Densification Relay Edge Cloud Mesh Backhaul Fronthaul 3G-4G 4G-5G

slide-3
SLIDE 3

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

3

Search for Alternate Spectrum

10 20 30 40 50 70-80

No Mobile Allocation In Region 1 & 2

<1 GHz <4 GHz <4 GHz 7 GHz

Global MS

<3 GHz

Global MS Global MS Global MS

24.25 25.25 27 31 38.6 42.5 47.2 50.2 57 64

5+5 GHz

Global MS

60 GHz Band Unlicensed 40 GHz Band Licensed LMDS Band Licensed 24 GHz Band Licensed 50 GHz Band Licensed 70-80 GHz Bands Minimal Licensed 3

Current IMT bands

1

slide-4
SLIDE 4

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

4

Reuse mmWave Knowledge

Legacy Bands < 3.8 GHz

New Bands < 6 GHz

Bands > 6 GHz

(+mmWAVE)

Licensed Unlicensed Licensed Unlicensed 28 GHz 39 GHz 45 GHz

70-90

GHz 60 GHz

LAA

6-24 GHz

WiFi Licensed Unlicensed WiFi

* Categorized based on channel models and path loss ** Potentially the same technology elements could be used across a range of frequencies

slide-5
SLIDE 5

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

5

mmWave Path-Loss Comparisons

2.3 GHz 28 GHz 38 GHz 73 GHz

Oxygen Absorbance

slide-6
SLIDE 6

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

eNB Aggregation

6

HetNet with mmWave Capable Small Cells (MCSC)

eNB eNB

MCSC MCSC MCSC MCSC MCSC MCSC

28 ,39 or 60 GHz

slide-7
SLIDE 7

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

7

Network Densification Topology

Fiber Node Distribution Node Access Node

slide-8
SLIDE 8

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

8

High Frequency Beam Forming

slide-9
SLIDE 9

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

9

Challenges in mmWave Systems Design

  • Higher Path Loss
  • To compensate with the high path loss higher gain antenna and/or

higher transmit power is required

  • EIRP, TX power and RF exposure limit are regulated
  • Massive MIMO is required for high gain antennas
  • Transmission becomes highly directional
  • With Narrow beams, tracking of the UE becomes challenging
  • Feed line loss
  • Diminishing return occurs as size of array increases
  • Transmission loss increases as function of frequency
slide-10
SLIDE 10

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

10

Challenges in RF & Antenna

  • Feed line loss: (8-by-8) elements

Antenna spacing:

λ 2 = 𝑑/𝑔 2 = 5𝑛𝑛 2

= 2.5mm 60 GHz Antenna spacing:

λ 2 = 𝑑/𝑔 2 = 7.69𝑛𝑛 2

@ 28 GHz is 5.36mm and @ 39 GHz is 3.85mm From 60 GHz to 28 GHz (or 38 GHz),

  • The required area getting bigger then feed line getting longer (roughly double).
  • Feed loss is also a function of frequency (higher loss at 60 GHz)

28 or 39 GHz

slide-11
SLIDE 11

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

Modular RFEM Configurations

Antenna Side Shield Side 60GHz Operation 16 Elements 25.2 mm x 9.8 mm 64 elements 128 elements 32 elements 16 elements 128 elements

slide-12
SLIDE 12

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

12

MAA POC Evolution

G3S Indoor G3 Indoor G3M Indoor G1 Indoor G2 Indoor

  • Discrete
  • MAA 128 (2x4)
  • Maple-M & R
  • EIRP ~ 43 dBm
  • 300 x 220 x 150
  • Partial PCB
  • MAA 128 (1x8)
  • Maple-M & R
  • EIRP ~ 43 dBm
  • 160 x 140 x 110
  • Stack up PCB
  • MAA 128 (1x8)
  • Maple-M & R
  • EIRP ~ 43 dBm
  • 160 x 140 x 110
  • Stack up PCB
  • MAA 128 (2x4)
  • Maple-M & R
  • EIRP ~ 43 dBm
  • Reduce Side lobe
  • Stack up PCB
  • MAA 128 (2x4)
  • Maple-M
  • MAA-RFEM
  • EIRP ~ 48 dBm
  • 160 x 140 x 110

G4 Outdoor

  • 190 x 170 x 140
slide-13
SLIDE 13

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

Hardware Overview

  • Indoor Design
  • Easy access to ports
  • Easy signal breakout for chamber tests
  • Easy tabletop, tripod, post, ceiling installation
  • Antenna Array
  • 128 elements - 8x16 array - balanced feeds
  • Tiled 8x RFEMs based on Intel WiGig product
  • 1x Intel WiGig Baseband Modem Module

GEN3+ Evaluation Kit

13 Intel Confidential

slide-14
SLIDE 14

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

Link Budget Calculation

ITU Region N (1 Gbps threshold)

Assumptions

  • Noise figure + implementation loss: (10.5 + 3) dB
  • PER < 1%
  • AWGN channel (phase impairment considered)

Calculate SNR values and find supportable MCS in AWGN channels LOS Backhaul Access No rain 650 m 380 m 99.00% availability 600 m 360 m 99.90% availability 470 m 290 m 99.99% availability 350 m 230 m

slide-15
SLIDE 15

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

Antenna Field Regions

D

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Anant Gupta, UCSB Under the direction of: Professor Madhow of UCSB and Professor Amin of Standard Oct 31, 2016

slide-17
SLIDE 17

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

Goal: Sparse array of subarrays for directive & steerable beams with:

  • Sparse placement of subarrays (4x4 element arrays).
  • Optimal phase shifts for beamsteering.

Attribute:

  • Larger aperture  Directivity ↑ and BW ↓
  • Sparse arrays with same/fewer elements

Challenge:

  • Sub-Nyquist generates aliasing and grating lobes
  • Problem different from traditional 2D placement (subarray

elements are fixed)

Approach: Non uniform configurations perform better in all metrics

  • Optimal placement of sub-arrays and phase processing
  • Algorithmic/application-level resiliency to aliasing (e.g. for

imaging)

Sparse Array of Sub-Arrays

Sparse array conventional array Intel MAA-RFEM 4x4 Module

slide-18
SLIDE 18

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

Early Insights

Trade-offs in different architectures: Metrics: BW, Grating/side lobes, Directivity

Directivity saturates beyond certain aperture size

2 4 6 8 10 Subarray seperation (6) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 GD (dB)

Directivity v/s Subarray Seperation

plus Square

Benchmark Sparse Non-uniform

  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 3°

  • 30
  • 25
  • 20
  • 15
  • 10
  • 5

Normalized Gain Gfinal Horizontal ?=0°

SEP2 MRA Uniform Benchmark

slide-19
SLIDE 19

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

Major Metrics & Approach

20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Elements

  • 9.2
  • 9
  • 8.8
  • 8.6
  • 8.4

MSLL Sequential Steering weight Optimization

Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 4

Cost functions

  • MSLL: Maximum Side lobe level(relative to main lobe)
  • Directivity Gain-
  • 2D Beamwidth: (3 dB beam)Max* (3 dB beam)Min
  • ASLL (Average Side Lobe Level)

Sub-Array Placement: Greedy search

  • Sequentially search for subarray positions on all possible

locations of grid (dx=0.5λ, dy=0.6λ).

Steering weight optimization: Sequential Optimization

  • Scan for best steering weight across all elements to

reduce MSLL.

slide-20
SLIDE 20

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

Tradeoffs in Performance

Observations and tradeoffs

Tradeoff between beamwidth and sidelobe level as aperture size increases.

Beamwidth ∝ (Aperture area)-1

crc + lin B

Configs

  • 20
  • 15
  • 10
  • 5

dB MSLL(rel. to mainlobe)

crc + lin B

Configs

22 24 26 28

dBi Directivity Gain GD

crc + lin B

Configs

  • 25
  • 20
  • 15

dB ASLL(rel. to mainlobe)

crc + lin B

Configs

101 102 103

deg2 Beamwidth(deg 2)

Naive Seq-phase-Optimized Ideal

  • 10

10

x - 6 units

  • 10
  • 5

5 10

y - 6 units Plus

  • 10

10

x - 6 units

  • 10
  • 5

5 10

y - 6 units Circle

  • 10

10

x - 6 units

  • 10
  • 5

5 10

y - 6 units Pseudo Linear

  • 10

10

x - 6 units

  • 10
  • 5

5 10

y - 6 units Benchmark

slide-21
SLIDE 21

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

Early Results; trade-offs in beam steering

Observations and tradeoffs

Phase optimization to ↓ MSLL causes ↓ Directivity.

Tradeoff between Directivity gain & sidelobe level with phase optimization

Beamwidth ∝ (Aperture area)-1

20 40 60

Steering Angle(El.)

22 24 26 28 GD(dBi)

Plus

20 40 60

Steering Angle(El.)

22 24 26 28 GD(dBi)

Circle

Theory Ideal Rounding Phase-opt

20 40 60

Steering Angle(El.)

23 24 25 26 27 28 GD(dBi)

Linear

20 40 60

Steering Angle(El.)

23 24 25 26 27 GD(dBi)

Benchmark Directivity v/s steering

  • 10

10 x - 6 units

  • 10
  • 5

5 10 y - 6 units

Plus

  • 10

10 x - 6 units

  • 10
  • 5

5 10 y - 6 units

Circle

  • 10

10 x - 6 units

  • 10
  • 5

5 10 y - 6 units

Pseudo Linear

  • 10

10 x - 6 units

  • 10
  • 5

5 10 y - 6 units

Benchmark

slide-22
SLIDE 22

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

Beam width is roughly inverse of physical array aperture width

Beamwidth and Aperture

slide-23
SLIDE 23

iCDG - Intel Communication and Devices Group

23

Conclusion

  • Substantial effort has been focused in the industry on the 5G access

technology to improve capacity, latency, throughput, scalability and quality

  • f service;
  • Access technology alone cannot significantly improve network capacity;
  • An end-to-end 5G system need be augmented by flexible and high

throughput backhaul and fronthaul;

  • mmWave technology is a great candidate for both access and backhauling to

increase network throughput and capacity, and lower interference;

  • Sparse array architecture provides additional feature to optimize array

performance