COMBA TMA Trial Report

For CMPAK Site LHR4005_6

1
 Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. Performance Evaluation
2.1 Average Path Balance
2.2 TCH Call Drop Rate
2.3 Uplink Quality
2.4 Handover Performance
2.5 Stability of TMA
3. Conclusion

2
 Comba TMA Trial Report for CMPak LHR4005

1. Introduction

Comba and CMPak conducted a TMA Trial at site LHR4005_6 in Lahore on 31st July 2009. The
TMA performance evaluation is documented in this report.

This document is to show that TMA can greatly improve the imbalance between downlink and
uplink so that can reduce the call drop rate and HO rates due to uplink as well as improve the
quality of uplink signal.

Especially in the DCS1800 system, TMA can enhance the weak uplink signal strength in the weak
coverage area such as indoor area so that can improve subscriber’s indoor call experience.

2. Performance Evaluation

LHR4005 was chosen as a trial site as the HO rates of the site was mainly due to weak uplink
signal strength and weak uplink signal quality.

The statistics collected are Average Path Balance, TCH Call Drop Rate (exclude handover), TCH
Call Drop Rate (include handover), UL QUAL, HO Attempt UL LEV LOW, HO Attempt PBGT,
and HO Attempt DL LEV LOW. And to evaluate the stability of TMA, the running status of
previous Comba TMA installed on last Sep. in Lahore is also listed.

2.1 Average Path Balance

The Average Path Balance gives the difference between downlink and uplink path losses. A larger
value indicates that the downlink path loss, and hence coverage, is larger than the uplink. With the
installation of the TMA, DL-UL path difference has reduced from around 12~14 dB to round about
0 dB, as shown in Figure 11. The 12 dB improvement is due to the uplink gain of the TMA, which
is around 12 dB. From the statistics, we see that the TMA has significantly improved the uplink
signal strength at the BTS.

3
 L

Average of PB
14

12

Figure 11: Average of DL-UL statistics

10
2.2 TCH Call Drop Rate

The percentage TCH Call Drop Rate (exclude handover) and percentage TCH Call Drop Rate
(include handover) are shown in figures 12 and 13. In both cases, call drop have reduced to 0.1 ~
8
0.2 from 0.4 ~ 0.6, as previously the main reason for call drop was due to weak uplink signals. The
installation of the TMA enhances the uplink signal strength; hence drop call due to poor uplink

0
31/07/09

2/8/2009

4/8/2009
29/07/09

30/07/09

1/8/2009

3/8/2009

4
-2
signal strength is reduced to zero

Average of TCH in call drop rate(exclude han

0.70%

0.60%
Figure 12: TCH Call Drop Rate % (exclude handover) statistics

0.50%

0.40%

Average of TCH in call drop rate(include han

0.50%
0.30%

0.45%
0.20%
0.40%
Figure 13: TCH Call Drop Rate % (include handover) statistics

0.10%
0.35% 5
2.3 Uplink Quality

Figure 14 shows the plot of sum of UL Qual. With the TMA installed, stronger uplink signals are
received by the BTS, and this gives an increase in number of good UL Qual calls.

Average of Avg. RX QUAL UL

102

100

98 Figure 14: UL Qual statistics

2.4 Handover Performance

96
The handover performance of site LHR4005 has improved with TMA. Figure 15 shows that the
number of urgency handovers due to weak uplink signal strength has reduced to almost zero after
the TMA is installed. With lower urgency handover, the number of handovers due to Power Budget
improved by 10%, as shown in Figure 15. Hence, we see that more mobiles in the cell will
94
handover to a stronger neighbor cell, leading to a lower probability of call drop.

92

90

88
6
 Average of UL LEV HO %
60

50
Figure 15: Number of Handover Attempt due to Low Uplink Signal Strength statistics

40

30
Average of PBGT HO %
35

20
30
Figure 16: Number of Handover Attempt due to Power Budget statistics

10 7
25
Figure 17 shows the statistics for number of handover attempts due to weak downlink signal
strength. There is a increase in number of handover attempts. This is usually expected of a TMA
site, where the uplink signal strength is greatly improved, causing the uplink cell radius to be larger
than the downlink. Hence, mobiles moving towards the cell boundary will either experience a
stronger neighbour cell (power budget handover), or weak downlink signal strength (urgency
handover). Another reason is due to the slightly higher downlink loss due to insertion loss of the
bias tee, TMA and additional jumper cable. These additional losses typically amount to around
1 dB or less. The uplink gain of the TMA can be reduced slightly if a balanced link is desired.

Average of DL LEV HO%

70

60

Figure 17: Number of Handover Attempt due to Low Downlink Signal Strength statistics

50
2.5 Stability of TMA

In last September, on cell LHR4541_6, TMA trial was done. Current statistics of this cell are
attached below:

40

30
8
 Sum of Path Balance (
0
2009-08-05 2

-0.2
Average of UL Qual %
92

-0.4
90 9
 Average of TCH in c
1.00%

0.90%

0.80% Average of TCH in c

0.35%

0.70%
10
0.30%
 Average of C100490056
60

50
Average of C100490048
1.6

40
1.4 11
3. Conclusion

The results have confirmed that TMA is suitable for sites where uplink signal strength is weak,
leading to higher urgency handover requests and subsequent call drops and low signal quality. The
use of TMA reduces the link imbalance and increases the probability of power budget handover
and reduced TCH call drop.

TMA can be not only deployed in rural areas, but also can be applied in urban areas where call
drops and high HO rate may be due to weak uplink from mobiles inside buildings.

12