The Comparative Study of S-V Model Between 3.5 and 28 GHz in Indoor and Outdoor Scenarios

The 3.5 GHz and 28 GHz bands are both very important for the fifth-generation (5 G) wireless communication system. To model their propagation characteristics and study their channel properties, we conduct measurements at these two bands in indoor and outdoor scenarios. The measured bandwidths at 3.5 and 28 GHz are 100 and 400 MHz, respectively. To make a fair comparison, the measurement results at 28 GHz are divided into four groups with bandwidths from 100 to 400 MHz. This is also helpful to study the effect of bandwidth on the channel properties, especially numbers of clusters and their growth rate. We choose the Saleh-Valenzuela (S-V) model to analyze the wireless channel. Its cluster-based property is very suitable to describe the power delay profiles (PDPs) in our measurement. To maintain the time continuity of multipath components (MPCs) during the clustering, we propose a new heuristic cluster algorithm. Based on the clustering results, we obtain the channel parameters, i.e., the number of clusters, inter-cluster interval, intra-cluster root mean square (RMS) delay spread, cluster decay factor, and ray decay factor. From the comparative study, we can find that the rays suffer a larger attenuation at 28 GHz than at 3.5 GHz. Increasing bandwidth can increase the ray decay factor. But the effects of frequency on the cluster decay rate are different in indoor and outdoor scenarios. The cluster decay rate is smaller at 28 GHz in the indoor scenario.

[1]  Theodore S. Rappaport,et al.  Indoor and Outdoor 5G Diffraction Measurements and Models at 10, 20, and 26 GHz , 2016, 2016 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM).

[2]  Jianhua Zhang,et al.  Clustering in 3D MIMO Channel: Measurement-Based Results and Improvements , 2015, 2015 IEEE 82nd Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2015-Fall).

[3]  George L. Turin,et al.  A statistical model of urban multipath propagation , 1972 .

[4]  Ernst Bonek,et al.  A Framework for Automatic Clustering of Parametric MIMO Channel Data Including Path Powers , 2006, IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference.

[5]  David J. Edwards,et al.  Bandwidth-dependent modelling of small-scale fade depth in wireless channels , 2008 .

[6]  Xu Sun,et al.  Characterization of ultra-wideband channels for outdoor office environment , 2005, IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, 2005.

[7]  Theodore S. Rappaport,et al.  Propagation Models and Performance Evaluation for 5G Millimeter-Wave Bands , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology.

[8]  Christos Masouros,et al.  On the Performance of Spatially Correlated Large Antenna Arrays for Millimeter-Wave Frequencies , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation.

[9]  Xiaohu You,et al.  A General 3-D Non-Stationary 5G Wireless Channel Model , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Communications.

[10]  Jie Huang,et al.  Multi-Frequency mmWave Massive MIMO Channel Measurements and Characterization for 5G Wireless Communication Systems , 2017, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[11]  Fredrik Tufvesson,et al.  5G: A Tutorial Overview of Standards, Trials, Challenges, Deployment, and Practice , 2017, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[12]  Moe Z. Win,et al.  The ultra-wide bandwidth indoor channel: from statistical model to simulations , 2002, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[13]  Christian Schneider,et al.  Investigations on fading scaling with bandwidth and directivity at 60 GHz , 2017, 2017 11th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EUCAP).

[14]  Hao Jiang,et al.  A 3-D Non-Stationary Wideband Geometry-Based Channel Model for MIMO Vehicle-to-Vehicle Communications in Tunnel Environments , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology.

[15]  Michael Cheffena,et al.  Power delay profile analysis and modeling of industrial indoor channels , 2015, 2015 9th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP).

[16]  Theodore S. Rappaport,et al.  Indoor Office Wideband Millimeter-Wave Propagation Measurements and Channel Models at 28 and 73 GHz for Ultra-Dense 5G Wireless Networks , 2015, IEEE Access.

[17]  Desmond P. Taylor,et al.  A Statistical Model for Indoor Multipath Propagation , 2007 .

[18]  Theodore S. Rappaport,et al.  Omnidirectional path loss models in New York City at 28 GHz and 73 GHz , 2014, 2014 IEEE 25th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communication (PIMRC).

[19]  Mansoor Shafi,et al.  Impact of Microwave and mmWave Channel Models on 5G Systems Performance , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation.

[20]  Jianhua Zhang,et al.  Modelling of Human Body Shadowing Based on 28 GHz Indoor Measurement Results , 2016, 2016 IEEE 84th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall).

[21]  Homayoun Hashemi,et al.  Impulse Response Modeling of Indoor Radio Propagation Channels , 1993, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[22]  Alain Sibille,et al.  Millimeter-wave outdoor-to-indoor channel measurements at 3, 10, 17 and 60 GHz , 2017, 2017 11th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EUCAP).

[23]  Fabiano Vargas da Silva Coelho,et al.  Simulation of Indoor-Outdoor and Outdoor-Indoor Radio Channel in 960-1700 MHz Band , 2017, IEEE Latin America Transactions.

[24]  Joon-Yong Lee,et al.  UWB Channel Modeling in Roadway and Indoor Parking Environments , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology.

[25]  Yi Zheng,et al.  Propagation Characteristics of Mobile Channel in Urban Micro-Cells at 3.5 GHz and 6 GHz , 2016, 2016 IEEE 83rd Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring).

[26]  Jianhua Zhang,et al.  6–100 GHz research progress and challenges from a channel perspective for fifth generation (5G) and future wireless communication , 2017, Science China Information Sciences.

[27]  Kim Myung-Don,et al.  Millimeter-wave channel model parameters for urban microcellular environment based on 28 and 38 GHz measurements , 2016 .

[28]  Fredrik Tufvesson,et al.  Microwave vs. Millimeter-Wave Propagation Channels: Key Differences and Impact on 5G Cellular Systems , 2018, IEEE Communications Magazine.