Terrain Models
EE 542
Fall 2008
O. Kilic EE 542
Outline
Fixed Terrestrial Links
Terrain as sharp edges
Outdoor propagation models
Satellite Links
References:
Simon R. Saunders, Antennas and Propagation for
Wireless Communication Systems, Wiley.
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
PR = PT GT GR
R
4
PR
= GT GR
PT
4 R
PT GT GR 4 R
LFS
=
PR
LFS (dB) = 32.4 + 20log R + 20log f MHz
2
O. Kilic EE 542
1
0.225
= 20log
v
v 2
O. Kilic EE 542
Solution
a)
O. Kilic EE 542
Solution
a)
h = 60m o = 10 km ro = 20 km
Single KE Loss:
R1 =
o ro
; = 3 102 m
o + ro
vh 2
2 30 103
= 60
=6
R1
3 102 10 103 20 103
ro
O. Kilic EE 542
0.225
v
Solution
a)
Total path Loss:
L = LFS + LKE
(dB )
O. Kilic EE 542
Solution
b)
0.225
LKE (dB) = 27 = 20log
0.225
v=
=5
10
o ro
h=v
= v 10 = 50 m
2( o + ro )
27
20
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
Bullington (1946)
Epstein (1953)
Deygout (1994)
Giovanelli (modification to
Deygout)
O. Kilic EE 542
Bullington Method
Defines a new effective obstacle at the point where the LOS from the two antennas
cross.
Equivalent problem:
hm
RX
TX
O. Kilic EE 542
Bullington Method - 2
Very simple method
Important obstacles can be ignored,
therefore losses can be underestimated
Reasonably accurate when two KEs re
relatively close.
Not an accurate method in general as the
same equivalent KE can be the solution to
multiple scenarios.
O. Kilic EE 542
Bullington Method -3
hm
b
RX
TX
Cases a and b are treated identically.
O. Kilic EE 542
Epstein-Peterson Method
L = L1 + L2
L1: (TX-1-2)
L1 = L(d1,d2,h1)
L2: (2-3-RX)
L2 = L(d3,d4,h3)
h1
h3
2
TX
RX
d1
d2
d3
O. Kilic EE 542
d4
Epstein-Peterson - 2
Overcomes the primary limitation of
Bullington that important obstacles can
be ignored.
Has large errors for two closely spaced
obstructions. In this case Bullington
method is better.
O. Kilic EE 542
Deygout Method
Search the entire path for a main obstacle,
i.e., the point with the highest value of v
along the path.
Diffraction losses over "secondary"
obstacles may be added to the diffraction
loss over the main obstacle.
Diffraction for secondary obstacles is
calculated wrt the main obstacle and the
visible terminal.
O. Kilic EE 542
Deygout Method - 2
L = Lm + L1 + L2
Secondary term
L1: TX-1-m
L1 = L(d1,d2,h1)
Main term
h1
Secondary term
L2: m-2-RX
L2 = L(d3,d4,h2)
h2
m
1
TX
d1
d2
Main obstacle
vmax
d3
Lm: TX-m-RX
Lm = L(d1+d2,hm,d3+d4)
O. Kilic EE 542
d4
RX
Deygout Method - 3
Typically agrees well with rigorous
techniques
Overestimates loss, especially when there
are multiple obstacles close together
The accuracy is higher when there is one
dominant obstacle
Superior to Bullington and EpsteinPeterson methods for highly obstructed
paths
O. Kilic EE 542
Giovanelli Method
Modification to Deygout Method
Identifies a main obstacle as in Deygout.
Find a reference point for diffraction
calculations
O. Kilic EE 542
Giovanelli Method
L = Lm + L1
Main term
L1
hm
RX
m
1
TX
d1
d3
d2
L1: m-1-RX
L1 = L(d2,d3,h1)
Lm: TX-1-RX
Lm = L(d1,d2+d3,hm)
O. Kilic EE 542
h1
RX
Other Methods
Many different approaches exist.
Some are modifications to the methods
mentioned.
Examples:
Causebrook
Vogler (analytic approach)
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
Vogler
grazing
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
Vogler
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
Longley-Rice
Durkin
Okumura
Hata
Lee
.. So on
O. Kilic EE 542
Okumura Model
One of the most widely used models for signal
prediction in urban areas.
Fully empirical method, based on extensive
series of measurements made around Tokyo.
There is no attempt to base the prediction to a
physical method.
In general applicable to
f: [150 MHz 1920 MHz]
D: [1km 100 km]
H: [30 m 1000 m]
Okumura-Hata Model
Hata approximated Okumuras
measurements in a set of formulae.
The urban values have been standardized
by ITU for international use.
The method involves dividing the area into
a series of categories: open, suburban and
urban.
O. Kilic EE 542
Okumura-Hata Model
The median path loss are calculated using
the following expressions:
URBAN:
L(dB) = A + BlogR E
SUBURBAN L(dB) = A + BlogR C
OPEN
L(dB) = A + BlogR - D
O. Kilic EE 542
Okumura-Hata Model
A = 69.55 + 26.16log f c 13.82log hb
B = 44.9 6.55log hb
2
f
C = 2 log( c ) + 5.4
28
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542
O. Kilic EE 542