See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/284732779

On the downlink capacity of LTE cell

Conference Paper · November 2015

DOI: 10.1109/TELFOR.2015.7377443

CITATION READS

1 2,044

3 authors, including:

Igor Tomic Milutin Davidovic

Ericsson Ericsson, Serbia
11 PUBLICATIONS   34 CITATIONS    2 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

FP7 LOLA - Achieving LOw-LAtency in Wireless Communications View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Milutin Davidovic on 27 November 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 23rd Telecommunications forum TELFOR 2015
On the downlink capacity of LTE cell
Igor A. Tomić, Milutin S. Davidović and Sanja M. Bjeković, Ericsson d.o.o
Abstract — Mobile networks are experiencing last few years
data tsunami, where traffic is growing exponentially, together
with user demands in terms of network performance. In such
circumstances, mobile operators are upgrading existing 2G/3G
networks to LTE, which significantly improves user experience,
both in terms of throughput and latency, and provides needed
capacity. In this paper the focus is on downlink capacity, which
is more critical. In order to analyze downlink capacity and
potential ways of improvement, the first part of the paper will
deal with estimation of throughput in different part of the cells
for different network load situation. It will be done by analysis of
correlation between downlink throughput and level of signal,
measured as Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) for
various network load expressed as average Resource Block (RB)
utilization. Next step will be downlink cell capacity estimation, in
the second part of the paper, which will be derived for different
networks load and different site density. Downlink ring method
is used for calculation of the cell capacity where network load, as
well as distribution of the users in the cell area and site density, is
taken in all capacity consideration. Finally, the potential ways for
capacity improvements will be discussed in conclusion part.
Results are based on field measurements from the real network
in combination with channel and wave propagation models.
Index Terms — Long Term Evolution (LTE), Orthogonal
frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM), Signal to Interference
plus Noise Ratio (SINR), eNodeB, Radio Base Station (RBS),
Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP), average cell
throughput, network load, downlink throughput, network
performance, RF design, User Equipment (UE), Reference Signal
(RS), Resource Block (RB), path loss, interference factor (F-
factor), MIMO (Multiple-Input/Multiple-Output).
I. INTRODUCTION
obile Network Operators are faced with soaring data
M traffic. Data is growing exponentially, due to
increasing user demands, where video content based
services are typically one of the major contributors. To
address such growing user needs, mobile operators are forced
to evolve and transform their networks and perform different
actions, where some of the most typical are: to improve
spectral efficiency, expand used spectrum, introduce new
technologies, add small cells, offload networks to WiFi etc.
From Shannon channel capacity formula it is evident that
main way for capacity improvement is expansion of used
channel bandwidth. Introduction of LTE is the key step, as it
provides superb user experience and utilizes new spectrum
efficiently and with flexibility. With LTE it is very easy to
add additional spectrum, especially with carrier aggregation.
Igor A. Tomić, Ericsson d.o.o, Milentija Popovica 5a, 11070,
Belgrade, Serbia (e-mail: igor.tomic@ericsson.com),
Milutin S. Davidović, Ericsson d.o.o, Milentija Popovica 5a, 11070,
Belgrade, Serbia (e-mail: milutin.davidovic@ericsson.com),
Sanja M. Bjeković, Ericsson d.o.o, Milentija Popovica 5a, 11070,
Belgrade, Serbia (e-mail: sanja.bjekovic@ericsson.com).
978-1-5090-0055-5/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
Serbia, Belgrade, November 24-26, 2015.
On the other hand, LTE is designed to improve latency
significantly, which is very important for high demanding
applications, as well as for E2E TCP/IP performance at high
throughputs.
Impact of LTE on user experience was analyzed in [1],
while this paper tend to analyze additional capacity introduced
by LTE, and based on conducted analysis to discuss potential
ways for further improvements. Analysis is focused on
downlink, which is more critical from capacity prospective.
II. USER DOWNLINK THROUGHPUT – THEORETICAL
CONSIDERATIONS
Downlink throughput in LTE is mainly driven by
interference, where due to OFDM only inter-cell interference
is relevant. Interference depends on several factors, however
two main should be elaborated in details. First is the quality of
radio network design, where typical measures for
improvement are proper site selection, antenna choice and
tilting, implementation of some advanced radio functionalities
and result of other RF optimization activities. Second is
network load, which is actually amount of traffic in the
network, and need to be properly addressed by network
dimensioning.
When it comes to the quality of radio network design,
commonly accepted good measure is the interference factor
(𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟), defined as
∑𝑖≠𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑖
𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = (1)
𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙
where ∑𝑖≠𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑖 is the summation of all 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃s
detected by UE except the 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 which represents
𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 (Reference Signal Received Power) of the serving cell
(should be the best one detected). Interference factor is
calculated for each bin, and measure of quality of radio design
is average 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 in the system.
Network load is defined as percentage of used Resource
Blocks (RB), as defined in [2]. What it will be assumed in
calculations is that network load is evenly distributed among
cells, where a set of different values will be used to simulate
traffic growth in future (5 % - matching approximately
Reference Signals RS’s only, as well as other load values for
growing traffic, such as: 10 %, 20 %, 50 %).
According to (1), 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 depends on 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃.
Furthermore, high correlation between 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 and best
server 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 can be expected. This is logical, as 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟
actually measures dominancy of best server, and typically
there is good dominance close to antenna where 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 is
good, while dominance is worse far from antenna, when
𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 decreases and interference coming from neighboring
181
cells increases. Speaking about overall noise power, relevant powers that
At the same time, as already stated, 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 is measure will be taken in consideration are thermal noise power
of quality of radio design, which is highly impacted by sites (𝑁𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 ) and noise power added by UE (𝑁𝑎 ). Therefore,
density (site-to-site distance). Also, in networks with good overall noise power is
radio design it is desired to avoid antennas positioned at high
height, as they are causing overshooting, which is radio 𝑁 = 𝑁𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 + 𝑁𝑎 . (4)
propagation to areas where it is not desired to have certain cell
presence. Typical corrective measure to optimize RF design in Thermal noise power is defined as
order to achieve best server dominance is antenna tilting.
Fig. 1 presents results of simulation, showing dependence of 𝑁𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 = 𝑁𝑡 + 10 𝑙𝑜𝑔 𝐵𝑊 [dBm] (5)
𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 on antenna distance, for networks with different
average antenna tilts implemented (from zero to eight where 𝑁𝑡 is thermal noise power density (-174 dBm for
degrees). As can be seen on Fig. 1, tilt increase improves noise bandwidth [𝐵𝑊] of 1 Hz). In this particular case
𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟, as it decreases its value (ideally is zero). Reference Signal (RS), which is one subcarrier in LTE, is
observed. So bandwidth of interest is 𝐵𝑊 = 15 kHz.
According to that, 𝑁𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 = -132.24 dBm value will be
taken in calculation.
To define noise added by UE noise figure of UE (𝑁𝐹𝑈𝐸 )
must be known. It can be safely assumed 7 dB. Now, from the
definition of noise figure of a device
𝑁𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 +𝑁𝑎
𝑁𝐹𝑈𝐸 = (6)
𝑁𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙

overall noise power can be calculated as

𝑁 = 𝑁𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 + 𝑁𝑎 = 𝑁𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 (𝑁𝐹𝑈𝐸 ). (7)

As it was already remarked, useful signal 𝑆 is actually 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃

coming from the serving cell.
Finally, referring to (2), (3), (4) and (7) now 𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅 can be
defined as:
Fig. 1. 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 as a function of 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 for different average antenna tilts 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙
𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅 = . (8)
𝑄𝐿 ∑𝑖≠𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑖 + 𝑁𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 (𝑁𝐹𝑈𝐸 )
Having in mind all said, as a first step 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 will be
modelled as function of 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃. It will be done through If we divide denominator and numerator by 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 ,
process of measurement in the field and averaging value for we will have:
different 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 segments.
Next step is to link 𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅 to 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟. We will start 1
𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅 = ∑𝑖≠𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑖 . (9)
from the definition of 𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅 𝑄𝐿
𝑁
+ 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙
(𝑁𝐹𝑈𝐸 )
𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙

𝑆
𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅 =
𝐼+𝑁
where 𝑆 is useful signal (in this case it is actually
𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃serving cell), 𝐼 is interference coming from other
Reference Signals (RS) and 𝑁 is overall noise power.
Interference coming from other cells is actually a
summation of all 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃s detected by UE except the
𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 . Taking in calculation network load it is
defined as
𝐼 = 𝑄𝐿,𝑖 ∑𝑖≠𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑖 .
It will be assumed that network load is equally distributed in
the network and same in all cells (in the following equations it
will be used just as 𝑄𝐿 ).
(2) Looking back at (1), 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 can be noticed as one of the
numerator factors of the previous relation (9). After
replacement, we get the final relation for our calculation:
1
𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅 = (10)
𝑁𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 (𝑁𝐹𝑈𝐸 )
𝑄𝐿 𝐹𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 +
𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙
where 𝐹𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 is 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 of the monitored cell (the
serving one), network load QL is already assumed, while other
parameters have already been defined and can be calculated.
(3) 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 will be presented, as discussed, through
derived function of 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 (1), where correlation will be
modelled based on drive test logs analysis and
post-processing, where 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 will be extracted for
every sample/bin in the drive test. In such way there will be

182
signature of RF design quality incorporated in further
calculations.
It is important to mention few facts about network
configuration and settings. In this particular case, antenna
configuration was MIMO 2x2 and used channel bandwidth
was 15 MHz.
Now, when the relation between 𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅 and 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 is
created, 𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅 can be mapped for every 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 measured.
Then, there is good correlation (theoretical, but confirmed in
practice as well) between Downlink Throughput and 𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅. It
will lead us to Downlink Throughput estimation, where
simulator was used, one for the channel model EPA5 with
15 MHz of bandwidth. Finally, empirical curve Downlink
Throughput vs. RSRP will be generated and analyzed.
III. DOWNLINK THROUGHPUT VS. RSRP RELATION
In this chapter the calculation process will be described,
based on the measurement results obtained in the drive test.
At the end, the final results will be shown.
The first step, as discussed in previous chapter, was making
the correlation between 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 and 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃, according to
the (1). It is important to pay attention to that all parameters
needed for this relation, and also (2), were calculated in
decibels, not in watts, so recalculation in watts was made
before placing them into the relation. Following graph (Fig. 2)
presents the result of this step, in form of scatter – to
understand level of correlation, standard deviation and
introduced mistake in further averaging process.
Fig. 2. 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 as a function of 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃
As it can be seen on the scatter presented in Fig. 2, there is
correlation, but far from ideal, meaning that certain degree of
variation can be expected in realistic throughputs from
estimated later in calculations.
However, what is needed for further analysis is 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟
as function of 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 in form of a curve, not a scatter. Due to
that, the next logical step is to average these results over
certain bands.
Next figure (Fig. 3) presents the average 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟
183
within the different 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 ranges, with a step of
5 dB.
Fig. 3. Average downlink 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 as a function of 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 range
Looking at the Fig. 3, it can be concluded that the original
𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 (blue line) is behaving similarly in the most of
the 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 ranges except in range from -65 dBm to -55 dBm.
Since only this part is diverging from the rest, it can be
assumed that the reason of this deviation is probably
insufficient number of samples in this 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 range.
Furthermore, this can be confirmed by taking a deep look at
the Fig. 2. Having this in mind, this part of the curve was
extrapolated (red line) in order to eliminate effects of
statistical insignificance.
As derived correlation between 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 and 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 was
obtained from real field measurements, it should be stressed
that drive test campaign was done for operator who is in the
initial phase of deployment of LTE. In other words, changes
in modeled correlation and all future related results can be
expected as networks become more mature, and density of
LTE sites increases. Also, it should be noticed that exercise
results carry incorporated inside signature of radio network
design. Hence it is recommended to be repeated for other
mobile operators, or when site density is changed and new
sites are added, which can be expected in future.
According to (2) from Chapter II and considering the
results for the average 𝐹 − 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 within the 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 ranges,
the 𝑆𝐼𝑁𝑅 results were obtained for the networks in different
network load circumstances.
As it was mentioned before, the network load values taken
in calculation are 5 %, 10 %, 20 % and 50 %. The network
with the load around 5 to 10 % (Cell Reference Signals,
common and control channels) is considered as an unloaded
or very-low loaded network, and can be assumed for initial
network deployment phase. As network maturity grows, it can
be expected that number of subscriber will increase and load
will grow. Also it can be expected also that operator will add
new sites or additional carriers, to avoid congestions. Table 1
presents the results of this calculation part.
 [-75,-70) 84024.21 73216.94 61404.49 45849.86
TABLE 1: SINR WITHIN RSRP RANGES DEPENDING ON THE NETWORK [-70,-65) 84040.74 73226.51 61409.52 45851.77
LOAD (Q DL )
[-65,-60) 88638.7 78669.06 67211.11 51452.32
[-60,-55) 94461.86 86211.75 75755.57 60218.17
𝑹𝑺𝑹𝑷 range 𝑺𝑰𝑵𝑹 [dB]
[-55,-50) 101295.2 99657.95 94443.59 83012.62
[dBm] 𝑸𝑫𝑳 = 𝟓 % 𝑸𝑫𝑳 = 𝟏𝟎 % 𝑸𝑫𝑳 = 𝟐𝟎 % 𝑸𝑫𝑳 = 𝟓𝟎 %
[-130,-125) -2.59505 -2.89747 -3.44561 -4.76733
[-125,-120) 1.167384 0.020646 -1.63513 -4.53769
[-120,-115) 6.067268 5.138658 3.724119 1.090231 IV. AVERAGE DOWNLINK USER THROUGHPUT
[-115,-110) 10.52465 9.29315 7.550201 4.55794 CALCULATION – RING METHOD
[-110,-105) 14.44424 12.7537 10.59235 7.215437
[-105,-100) 17.57553 15.37665 12.83705 9.166675 Once achievable downlink throughputs are known for
[-100,-95) 18.15161 15.41714 12.55161 8.661447 different RSRP levels, or in other words for different
[-95,-90) 20.47858 17.61515 14.68019 10.74663 positions/cell areas, assuming equal density of distribution of
[-90,-85) 20.48568 17.52136 14.53424 10.56881
21.68078 18.68957 15.68885 11.7152
users over the cell area, next step in capacity analysis is to
[-85,-80)
[-80,-75) 23.69743 20.69673 17.69123 13.71472 understand average achievable cell throughput. For that
[-75,-70) 24.55193 21.54533 18.53687 14.55858 purpose, ring method will be used to approximate cell.
[-70,-65) 24.55698 21.54785 18.53814 14.55909 Ring methods are based on successive calculations for
[-65,-60) 26.01957 23.00978 19.99974 16.0205
28.23854 25.22851 22.21835 18.23903
defined ring-shaped regions of the cell. Commonly accepted
[-60,-55)
[-55,-50) 34.25058 31.24063 28.2305 24.2512 shape of cell model is hexagon. The idea of ring method is to
divide cell area into N rings where the number of users in ring
The next step is to map these SINRs to downlink i is directly proportional to the area of ring i. In other words,
throughput. This was done using the throughput calculator users are modeled to be uniformly distributed over the cell
already implemented for this purpose by setting the area. The concept of ring method is shown in Fig. 5.
configuration as the one that is used in this case.
Finally, desired relation between 𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 and downlink
throughput for different network loads is obtained,
and presented visually in Fig. 4. and numerically in Table 2.

Fig. 5. Illustration of ring method

In case of hexagonal cell model, ring areas can be easily

calculated from the definition of hexagonal area:

Fig. 4. Downlink throughput as the function of RSRP for different values of 3√3 𝑑 2
Q DL 𝑆𝑖 = ( 𝑖) (11)
2 2

where 𝑑𝑖 is diameter of outer range of ring i. The target ring

TABLE 2: DOWNLINK THROUGHPUT WITHIN RSRP RANGES area (shaded area in Fig. 1) can be calculated like
DEPENDING ON THE NETWORK LOAD (Q DL )
𝑹𝑺𝑹𝑷 range Downlink throughput [kbps] 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑡 = 𝑆𝑖 − 𝑆𝑖−1 . (12)
[dBm] 𝑸𝑫𝑳 = 𝟓 % 𝑸𝑫𝑳 = 𝟏𝟎 % 𝑸𝑫𝑳 = 𝟐𝟎 % 𝑸𝑫𝑳 = 𝟓𝟎 %
[-130,-125) 5286.42 4957.90 4511.61 3413.85
[-125,-120) 9965.03 8336.40 6276.86 3608.57 Maximum diameter of outer range of the ring, 𝑑𝑚𝑎𝑥 , is
[-120,-115) 19379.11 17267.44 14352.46 9847.881 actually the cell border, R.
[-115,-110) 31757.07 27976.82 23088.08 16024.25
[-110,-105) 45420.39 39257.92 31975.05 22218.22
As it was already stated, the number of users in ring i is
[-105,-100) 57578.17 48962.6 39552.47 27603.03 directly proportional to the area of ring i. Therefore, the ratio
[-100,-95) 59869.94 49117.72 38543.68 26140.81 between area of the target ring and area of whole cell
[-95,-90) 69091.76 57735.74 46309.86 32471.78 corresponds to the ratio between number of users in target
[-90,-85) 69119.64 57362.81 45757.79 31899.25
[-85,-80) 73730.66 62012.55 50166.78 35667.25
ring and number of users in whole cell. Based on this, the
[-80,-75) 81108.99 69941.47 58038.26 42717.76 proportion of users in ring i, 𝑝𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑟,𝑖 , is defined by following

184
equation:
𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑡 𝑆𝑖 − 𝑆𝑖−1
𝑝𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑟,𝑖 = = (13)
𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥
where 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 is area of the whole cell (ring diameter 𝑑𝑚𝑎𝑥 ).
Linking (11), (12) and (13), 𝑝𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑟,𝑖 can be also expressed like
𝑑𝑖2 − 𝑑𝑖−1
2
𝑝𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑟,𝑖 = 2 . (14)
𝑑𝑚𝑎𝑥
In order to calculate throughput for each ring, conditions
such as path loss, signal attenuation and SINR in each ring
must be determined. Path loss, as well as signal attenuation, is
directly related to RSRP detected by UE. Hence, knowing
RSRP on the position of UE and power of RS provide the
information about signal attenuation between RBS (Radio
Base Station) and UE. Well-known relation which links these
parameters is
𝑅𝑆𝑅𝑃 = 𝑃𝑡𝑥,𝑅𝑆 − 𝐿𝑠𝑎 [dBm] (15)
where Ptx,RS [dBm] is power of reference signal and Lsa [dB]
is signal attenuation. The relation between signal attenuation
and path loss is given by relation
𝐿𝑝 = 𝐿𝑠𝑎 − 𝐿𝐵𝐿 − 𝐿𝐶𝑃𝐿 − 𝐿𝐵𝑃𝐿 + 𝐺𝑎 − 𝐿𝑗 [dB] (16)
where 𝐿𝑝 is path loss due to propagation in the air, 𝐿𝐵𝐿 is the
body loss, 𝐿𝐶𝑃𝐿 is the car penetration loss, 𝐿𝐵𝑃𝐿 is the building
penetration loss, 𝐺𝑎 is the sum of the maximum gain in the
forward direction of the RBS antenna and UE antenna gain, 𝐿𝑗
is any losses due to jumpers installed between the antenna and
the RX reference point.
Based on these relations path loss for each ring can be
calculated. The path losses, 𝐿𝑝,𝑖 , to all positions in ring i are
modeled to be equal. The same is valid for the signal
attenuations, 𝐿𝑠𝑎,𝑖 .
Cell rings can be modeled based on distance step or the
path loss step. Using some of wave propagation models the
values of one parameter can be transformed to the values of
another.
Similar like it was modeled for path loss and signal
attenuation, SINR in each ring is modeled to be equal in all
positions in the ring. SINR can be measured and averaged in
each ring or it can be calculated from other measured
parameters.
The idea is to calculate average cell throughput in order to
estimate cell capacity based on the distribution of the user
over the cell ring areas. Having in mind that SINR in each
ring is determined and approximated as equal in whole ring
area, throughput of each ring can be calculated using some of
commonly accepted channel models (EPA5, EVA70 or
ETU300). The choice of the channel model depends on the
circumstances in the drive test (mainly depends on the speed
of the vehicle) [3]–[4].
The “ring” throughput for each ring can be directly
calculated from the proportion of the users, 𝑝𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑟,𝑖 , and
185
throughput, 𝑅𝑖 , for observed ring (ring i). Then, total average
user throughput presents the summation of all “ring”
throughputs:
𝑅𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑟,𝑎𝑣𝑒 = ∑𝑖 𝑝𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑟,𝑖 𝑅𝑖 . (17)
V. DOWNLINK CELL CAPACITY CALCULATION
This chapter is devoted to the calculation process described
in previous chapter and based on the measurements obtained
in drive tests.
Relying on previous estimation, cell will be divided in rings
with RSRP step of 5 dB. Using (15) from Chapter IV RSRP
levels of the ring borders are transformed in signal
attenuations. Then, path loss is calculated by (16). In this case,
measuring equipment was in inside the vehicle, so car
penetration loss (common value 6 dB) should be taken in
calculation. The other losses can be neglected.
The sum of the maximum gain in the forward direction of
the RBS antenna and UE antenna gain, 𝐺𝑎 , will be taken as
18,5 dBi. Path losses on ring borders are defining the ring
outer and inner diameters, 𝑑𝑖 and 𝑑𝑖−1 ,. Path loss to distance
transformation will be based on Okamura-Hata wave
propagation model [5-6].
Finally, for defined cell edge (𝑑𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) the proportion of users
in each ring , 𝑝𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑟,𝑖 , can be calculated (using (13), Chapter
IV).
Definition of the cell edge is based on the site density
(site-to-site distance) in the measured area of the network.
More precisely, it can be estimated from the drive test logs by
taking a deep look when the UE is making a handover. In this
case there were several different situations, because of
different site-to-site distance on the drive test route. This
diversity provides opportunities to make capacity estimation
for different cell edges. In future analysis, three different cell
edge definitions, matching three different site density/network
maturity scenarios, will be observed and analyzed:
 cell edge defined by RSRP = -120 dB,
 cell edge defined by RSRP = -100 dB,
 cell edge defined by RSRP = -80 dB.
Cell rings defined this way match with RSRP ranges, so all
conditions in ring areas are defined exactly the same like in
predefined RSRP ranges. Hence, SINR in each ring/RSRP
range is already known and used to calculate the throughput
(see Table 2, Chapter III).
These results were additionally extended, and study was
made for network loads from 5 % (which is considered as
unloaded network) to 100 % (fully loaded network). The final
results were obtained by including calculated throughputs and
proportion of users in each ring in final summation like it was
described in Chapter IV.
Table 3 presents expected average user throughput for
different network loads and Fig. 6 illustrates the same. As it
was already discussed, the estimation was made for different
cell edge definitions (site density in the network) and VI. AREA FOR CAPACITY IMPROVEMENT AND CONCLUSIONS
according to that, comparison of results was made. The main purpose of this paper is to understand the concept
cell capacity in LTE network and the factors that can affect it.
TABLE 3: AVERAGE USER THROUGHPUT DEPENDING ON NETWORK Obtained results show what performance can be expected
LOAD AND CELL EDGE DEFINITION.
depending on the site density (size of the cell) and load.
Average user throughput [kbps]
Network
Cell edge def. by Cell edge def. by Cell edge def. by
Preformed analysis has shown that cell capacity depends on
load several factors. These factors are limitative, but also make
RSRP = RSRP = RSRP =
(𝑸𝑳 )
-80 dB -100 dB -120 dB room for improvements, depending on the state of the
5% 81906.39 66150.98 32886.37 network.
10% 71475.59 55005.59 28444.53
15% 64858.44 48446.36 25424.69 Analysis of downlink capacity should always start from the
20% 60064.32 43894.93 23166.27 point that in general downlink performance is limited by
25% 56336.14 40464.56 21382.89 interference. Focusing on intra system interference that can be
30% 53305.35 37740.74 19925.95
35% 50765.27 35502.85 18702.23 addressed by system design, it should be understood that in
40% 48587.26 33614.10 17653.93 LTE systems interference is always inter-cell interference.
45% 46688.37 31990.88 16743.74 The main method of controlling inter-cell interference is RF
50% 45010.49 30574.65 15945.69
55% 43511.12 29322.63 15233.50
design, where dense network with small tucked cells and well
60% 42157.65 28202.44 14592.95 tilted antennas is desired, providing superb cell throughputs
65% 40927.00 27193.98 14018.37 and network performance.
70% 39802.80 26282.50 13491.85
75% 38766.46 25444.86 13013.01
The second aspect is network load, or system utilization in
80% 37808.33 24680.18 12570.96 terms of occupied RB. Network load tends to increase, as the
85% 36919.58 23971.97 12164.28 number of user in the cell/network is increasing and traffic
90% 36088.53 23316.92 11786.12 model is changing, as data usage per subscriber is growing
95% 35312.92 22705.76 11434.53
100% 34583.48 22138.02 11106.13 exponentially last couple of years. Adding cells to cope with
traffic growth is needed.
However, each way of eventual load decrease is more than
welcome. One quite significant source of interference is
power coming from Cell-Specific Reference Signals (CRS),
which are transmitted in a cell in each downlink subframe and
in each resource block in the frequency domain.
Approximately 5% of RE in RB, or to be precise 4 out of 84
RE are reference signals. The values of the CRS are uniquely
determined by the physical-layer cell ID and hence are
common to all terminals connected to this cell. The CRS are
used for channel estimation for coherent demodulation of
physical control channels and packet data channels (PDSCH)
in some of the transmission formats referred to as
transmission modes (CRS are used for TM 1–6). In the initial
releases of the LTE system, CRS can also be used by the user
terminals to measure channel state information (CSI), which
serves as the basis for link adaptation. The CRSs are also used
Fig. 6. Average user throughputs for different network loads/different site
density and cell capacity calculation
by terminals to make handover or cell reselection
measurements and decisions.
Finally, the difference between average user throughput and Possibilities for reduction of CRSs were analyzed in [7],
cell capacity should be discussed. Once average user two options were discussed – reduction in time and reduction
throughput is known for given load, cell capacity can be in frequency. However, both options require changes in 3GPP
calculated by simple multiplication: standard. In this paper the focus will be on options that are
already available in existing 3GPP and installed equipment.
Tcell,ave = QL R user,ave . (18) After analysis of existing standard, available functionalities in
eNodeB and work done in this area, it can be found that two
Example: For dense urban area, with short site-to-site options are available.
distance, where RSRP on cell edge is -80 dBm, average user The first is to play with settings of CRS power, with clear
throughput, 𝑅𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑟,𝑎𝑣𝑒 , is 45 Mbps at 50% network load (red idea to investigate effects of its reduction. Second idea is to
point in Figure 6). This means that cell capacity, 𝑇𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙,𝑎𝑣𝑒 , is investigate benefits and drawbacks of shifted and non-shifted
actually 22.5 Mbps in that case. PCI planning, described in [8]. In a non-shifted CRS
configuration the same time and frequency resources are used
for CRS transmissions in all cells. In shifted CRS

186
configuration different cells transmit CRSs on resources that [4]
are shifted in frequency. The non-shifted configuration avoids
that the CRSs interfere with data transmissions, but is also
associated with a systematic Channel State Information (CSI) [5]
estimation error; especially noticeable at low traffic. Using the
shifted configuration the CRSs interfere with data [6]
transmissions, but the CSI estimation error is smaller.
Two described possibilities for reduction of interference
[7]
coming from CRS signals, and its potential positive impact on
LTE capacity are planned to be part of future work in this
area. The intention is to test both options, and to evaluate [8]
them through detailed analysis of potential benefits and
drawbacks.
[9]
REFERENCES
[10]
[1] M.Davidovic, S.Bjekovic, I.Tomic : On the impact of network load on
LTE network downlink performance, ETRAN 2015, Srebrno Jezero. [11]
[2] 3GPP TS 36.211 v.12.5.0, 3rd Generation Partnership Project;
Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved
Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Physical Channels and [12]
Modulation
[3] 3GPP TS 36.101. "User Equipment (UE) Radio Transmission and
Reception." 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification [13]
Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio
Access (E-UTRA).
187
View publication stats
3GPP TS 36.104. "Base Station (BS) radio transmission and
reception." 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification
Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio
Access (E-UTRA).
Okamura, Y. a kol.: Field Strength and its Variability in VHF and UHF
Land-Mobile Radio Service. Rev. Elec. Comm. Lab. No.9, 10pp. 825–
73, 1968.
Hata, M.: Empirical Formula for Propagation Loss in Land Mobile
Radio Services. IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technology, VT-29, pp. 317–
25, 1980.
Havish Koorapaty, Jung-Fu (Thomas) Cheng, Stephen Grant, Jiann-
Ching Guey: Reference Signals for Improved Energy Efficiency in
LTE, Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Fall), 2013 IEEE 78th
Govardhan Madhugiri, Chrysostomos Koutsimanis, Per Skillermark:
Impact of CSI Optimization and CRS Selection on Performance of LTE
Release 8 Networks, Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring),
2014 IEEE 79th
E. Dahlman, S. Parkvall, J. Sköld, and P. Neming: 3G Evolution: HSPA
and LTE for Mobile Broadband, Academic Press, Oxford 2007.
E. Dahlman, S. Parkvall and J. Sköld: 4G LTE/LTE-Advanced for
Mobile Broadband, Academic Press, Oxford 2011
Christopher Cox, An Introduction to LTE: LTE, LTE-Advanced,
SAE and 4G Mobile Communications, John Wiley & The Sons Ltd,
New Jersey 2012
N. Gospić, I. Tomić, D. Popović and D. Bogojević: Razvoj mobilnih
telekomunikacija, od GSM do LTE, Univerzitet u Beogradu,
Saobraćajni fakultet, Beograd 2010.
I. Tomić, I. Simić: „3GPP LTE Long Term Evolution – sistem četvrte
generacije“, YUINFO2009 Kopaonik 8-11 mart 2009.