The random access procedure in LTE can benefit from selfoptimization. A mobile (User Equipment, UE in LTE) in an idle
state is essentially unknown to the network (except for some
rough localization information). In order to establish a relation to
the network, for example to initiate some service, the mobile
scans the carrier frequencies to determine the most suitable cell
and associated base station (eNodeB or eNB in LTE) for
communication. The broadcast information from this base station
provides the mobile with cell-specific random access procedure
details. Optimal random access performance is central to obtain
intended coverage and low delays, while avoiding excessive
interference to communication links in other cells and
maintaining a desired balance in the radio resource allocation
between random access and data services.. The considered delays
include call setup delays, session resuming delays, handover
delays, etc. The challenge is to balance the resource allocation
between random access and other communication needs, while
adapting to local radio characteristics, cell size and variations in
terms of traffic in the cell and neighboring cells.
I.
INTRODUCTION
c 2009 IEEE
978-1-4244-3924-9/09/$25.00
29
30
TX
CP
103 s
RA sequence
time
a) Format 0
TX
CP
RA sequence
684 s
800 s
time
b) Format 1
TX
CP
RA sequence
203 s
RA sequence
1600 s
TX
TX
CP
time
c) Format 2
RA sequence
684 s
RA sequence
1600 s
time
d) Format 3
frequency
PRACH
1 RB
Correlation zone
Correlation
Detection threshold
PUSCH
PUCCH
6 RB
preamble
Noise and interference
time
1 ms
20 ms
time
TCS
Roundtrip time estimate
(1)
31
station chooses one of the mobile identities and responds with the
identity of the selected mobile, and only this mobile acknowledge
the reception of the contention resolution.
C. Non-Contention-Based Random Access
This procedure is applicable when the base station can signal
a reserved random access preamble to the mobile, i.e. at handover
and uplink synch failure. In this case, all necessary information
(essentially timing) is acquired at the random access response.
III.
(2)
i =1
n d ,m ( k )
, n s ,m ( k ) > 0
1
DMRm (k ) = ns ,m (k )
n s ,m ( k ) = 0
0,
32
nd ( k ) = 0
0,
Finally, the access ratio is obtained via DMR and CR and (2).
The number of detected preambles nd and number of mobiles that
are granted access na are directly measurable at the base station
and it is therefore tractable to estimate CR. However, it is not
possible to measure ns at the base station unless this is reported
by the mobiles. An undetected preamble is simply a correlation
peak below the detection threshold (see Figure 4), which is
classified as noise at the base station detector. Henceforth, we
assume that mobiles report the number of attempts needed to
obtain access once the mobile is granted access to the network
(see the PREAMBLE_TRANSMISSION_COUNTER in [15]).
These reports from the mobile enable the derivation of DMRm.
Note that this particular mobile report is not yet standardized for
LTE at the moment of writing.
B. Radio Network and Random Access Modeling
The simulation work in this paper is based on a semi-static
simulator with random drops of mobiles without mobility
modeling, but with time correlations (e.g. a failed random access
attempt at one time instant will result in a retransmission by the
same mobile at later time). It models the random access
procedure in a multi-cell scenario with interfering uplink data
traffic. The network is deployed in a hexagonal layout of 7 sites
each 3-sectored and wrap-around propagation. The path loss
predictions are adopted from [18] and the antenna models from
[19].
The number of created mobiles at each drop that initiate the
random access procedure follows a Poisson process with the
mean arrival intensity LoadRACH (number of mobiles/second/cell),
and they are uniformly distributed over the simulated area.
Uplink data traffic is modeled by the PUSCH load (denoted
LoadPUSCH), defined as the fraction of the frequency band that is
used for PUSCH during a sumframe of 1ms (c.f. Fig. 4.). A cell
with no random access opportunity at a specific subframe
randomizes (depending on the PUSCH load) whether uplink data
is scheduled in the frequency band where random access is
configured. If uplink data is scheduled then a PUSCH user is
randomized in the cell. Moreover, PUSCH power control is based
on [16] and simplified to open-loop power control,
Attempt Nr 1
1
Pp g p ,c
I PUSCH , c + I RACH ,c + N
EE
Path loss L
Log-normal shadowing
TABLE II.
SIMULATION PARAMETERS
Value
Uniform
500 m (5000m Section IV.E)
8 degrees
23 dBm W
-89 dBm
-109 dBm W
3 dB
L = 128.1+37.6log10(d), d [km]
8 dB standard deviation
DEFAULT EXPERIMENT SETUP
Parameter
LoadPUCSH
LoadRACH
RACH Format
RACH Opp interval
P0_RACH
RACH
M
Simulation Time
IV.
0.5
Default Value
0.5
250 preambles/cell/s
0
5 ms
-120 dBW
2 dB
8
180 s
EXPERIMENTS
0.2
0.4
0.6
PUSCH Load
0.8
(a)
0.02
0.015
CR
SINRp , c =
DMR
0.01
-120dBW
-130dBW
-140dBW
0.005
-150dBW
0.2
0.4
0.6
PUSCH Load
0.8
(b)
Figure 5. DMR and CR as a function of LoadPUSCH and P0_RACH.
Note that the standard value for LoadRACH may seem too high.
Since at the time of the writing LTE has not been deployed in
large scale and typical loads are not yet available, we assume a
wide range of RACH loads in the simulations. The default
RACH load has been selected such that CR = 0.01 for one
random access opportunity per 5 ms [14]. Also a higher RACH
load enables shorter simulations times since more data is
gathered compared to a lower RACH load.
A.
Effects of Varying PUSCH Load
The goal of this experiment is to study the effects of P0_RACH
and LoadPUSCH on DMR and CR. Recall that P0_RACH dictates the
received signal power and LoadPUSCH determines the interference
on RACH. The parameters are altered according to LoadPUSCH =
{0.0,0.2,,1.0} and P0_RACH = [-150,-120] dBW in steps of 10
dBW.
As shown in Fig. 5(a) the DMR of the first attempt (DMR1)
increases with increasing LoadPUSCH and decreasing P0_RACH. The
DMR of attempts 2-8 show similar behavior. Fig. 5(a) indicates
that some P0_RACH values result in very low DMR and robustness
to varying LoadPUSCH and interference. Consequently it seems
that setting P0_RACH to, e.g., -130 dBW, will give a satisfactory
RACH performance. However, these results hold only for the
deployment used and the models and assumptions of, e.g.,
propagation, PUSCH and RACH. There may be cases where a
P0_RACH lower (or higher) than -130 dBW should be used
depending on prevailing conditions.
33
Attempt Nr 1
0.8
RACH=2
0.12
0.4
RACH=4
0.1
0.2
RACH=6
0
-150
CR
DMR
0.14
RACH=0
0.6
-145
-140
-135
-130
-125
-120
P0_RACH
RAOI = 20ms
RAOI = 5ms
RAOI = 2ms
RAOI = 1ms
0.08
0.06
0.04
Attempt Nr 3
0.8
0.02
DMR
0.6
0
0.4
0.2
0
-150
-145
-140
-135
-130
-125
-120
P0_RACH
0.8
DMR
0.6
0.4
0.2
-145
-140
-135
-130
P0_RACH
-125
400
600
RACH Load
800
-120
34
200
Attempt Nr 5
0
-150
C.
Effects of Varying RACH Load and Configuration
The goal of this experiment is to study the effects of RACH
load and RACH configuration on CR. RACH load is altered
according to LoadRACH = {100,300,,900} preambles/cell/s.
RACH configuration corresponds to random access opportunity
intervals (RAOI) of 20, 5, 2 , and 1 ms. Note that P0_RACH = -120
dBW, which results in the majority of the preambles to be
detected at the first attempt.
As expected CR increases with increasing LoadRACH and
increasing random access opportunity period (determined by the
RACH configuration), as shown in Fig. 7. The conclusion of this
experiment is that it is possible to control CR by altering the
configuration.
D.
Interference on PUSCH by Random Access Preambles
The goal of this experiment is to study the interference on
PUSCH generated by random access preamble transmissions.
The idea is to show whether there is a benefit of adjusting P0_RACH
in order to reduce the interference on PUSCH (compared to
setting P0_RACH = -120 dBW). The generated interference is a
function of the preamble transmission power and number
preamble transmissions. For this reason we vary P0_RACH and the
RACH load. The parameters are altered according to LoadRACH =
{1,5,10,25,50,100,200,300} preambles/cell/s and P0_RACH =
{-120,-130,-140,-150} dBW. Define the PUSCH noise rise as,
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
LoadRACH = 300
0.4
LoadRACH = 1
0.2
0
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0
0
10
15
Noise Rise (dB)
CDF
CDF
CDF
20
10
15
Noise Rise (dB)
(a)
20
(b)
10
15
Noise Rise (dB)
20
(c)
Figure 8. Noise rise distributions as functions of P0_RACH and LoadRACH: (a) P0_RACH = -120 dBW (b) P0_RACH = -130 dBW (c) P0_RACH = -140 dBW.
Attempt Nr 1
Format=0
Format=2
Format=3
DMR
0.1
0.05
0
-150
-145
-140
-135 -130
P 0_RACH
-125
-120
Attempt Nr 2
0.08
DMR
0.06
0.04
V.
0.02
0
-150
-145
-140
-135 -130
P0_RACH
-125
-120
Figure 9. DMR for first and second attempt and 5000 m inter-site distance.
NR =
I RACH ,tot + N RB
N RB
SELF-OPTIMIZATION EXAMPLE
35
LoadPUSCH
[2]
[3]
0.5
0
50
100
Time (s)
150
[4]
DMR
Target
[5]
150
[6]
DMR1
0.05
P 0RACH [dB]
50
100
Time (s)
-120
[7]
-130
0
50
100
Time (s)
150
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
VI.
CONCLUSION
36
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]