doc.: IEEE 802.

11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 1
Indoor MIMO WLAN Channel Models


Vinko Erceg, Laurent Schumacher, Persefoni Kyritsi,
Daniel S. Baum, Andreas Molisch,
and Alexei Y. Gorokhov
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 2
List of Participants
Vinko Erceg (Zyray Wireless)
Laurent Schumacher (Namur University)
Persefoni Kyritsi (Aalborg University)
Daniel Baum (ETH University)
Andreas Molisch (Mitsubishi Electric)
Alexei Gorokhov (Philips Research)
Srinath Hosur (Texas Instruments)
Srikanth Gummadi (Texas Instruments)
Eilts Henry (Texas Instruments)
Eric Jacobsen (Intel)
Sumeet Sandhu (Intel)
David Cheung (Intel)
Qinghua Li (Intel)
Clifford Prettie (Intel)
Heejung Yu (ETRI)
Yeong-Chang Maa (InProComm)
Richard van Nee (Airgo)
Jonas Medbo (Erricsson)
Eldad Perahia (Cisco Systems)
Helmut Boelcskei (ETH Univ.)




Hemanth Sampath (Marvell)
H. Lou (Marvell)
Pieter van Rooyen (Zyray Wireless)
Pieter Roux (Zyray Wireless)
Majid Malek (HP)
Timothy Wakeley (HP)
Dongjun Lee (Samsung)
Tomer Bentzion (Metalink)
Nir Tal (Metalink)
Amir Leshem (Metalink, Bar IIan University)
Guy Shochet (Metalink)
Patric Kelly (Bandspeed)
Vafa Ghazi (Cadence)
Mehul Mehta - Mickey (Synad Technologies)
Bobby Jose (Mabuhay Networks)
Charles Farlow (California Amplifier)
Claude Oestges (Louvain University)
Robert W. Heath (University of Texas at
Austin)


doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 3
WLAN MIMO Channel Modeling Goals

To develop a set of multiple-input multiple-output
(MIMO) channel models backwards compatible with
existing 802.11 channel models developed by Medbo and
Schramm [1].
Channel models can be used to evaluate new WLAN
proposals based on multiple antenna technologies.
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 4
Existing Models Overview
Five delay profile models for single-input single-output
(SISO) systems were proposed in [1] for different
environments (A-E):

1. Model A for a typical office environment, non-line-of-sight (NLOS)
conditions, and 50 ns rms delay spread.
2. Model B for a typical large open space and office environments, NLOS
conditions, and 100 ns rms delay spread.
3. Model C for a large open space (indoor and outdoor), NLOS
conditions, and 150 ns rms delay spread.
4. Model D, same as model C, line-of-sight (LOS) conditions, and 140 ns
rms delay spread (10 dB Ricean K-factor at the first delay).
5. Model E for a typical large open space (indoor and outdoor), NLOS
conditions, and 250 ns rms delay spread.

doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 5
We Follow Cluster Modeling Approach
In each of the A-E models distinct clusters can be clearly
identified.
Clustering approach is a common approach used for indoor
channel modeling, verified by numerous experimental
data.
Pioneer work done by Saleh and Valenzuela [2] and
further elaborated and extended upon by many researchers
[3-8].
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 6
Channel Model-A Example
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Delay in Nanoseconds
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

d
B
Three clusters can be clearly identified. Remaining
models B-E have 4,6,6, and 5 clusters, respectively.
Cluster 1
Cluster 2
Cluster 3
dB
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 7
Spatial Representation of 3 Clusters
LOS
Cluster 2
Tx Antennas
Rx Antennas
R2
Cluster 3
R3
Cluster 1
R1
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 8
Modeling Approach
Only time domain information from A-E SISO models can
be determined (delay of each delay within each cluster and
corresponding power using extrapolation methods).
In addition, for the MIMO clustering approach the
following parameters have to be determined:

Power azimuth spectrum (PAS) shape of each cluster and tap
Cluster angle-of-arrival (AoA), mean
Cluster angular spread (AS) at the receiver
Cluster Angle-of-departure (AoD), mean
Cluster AS at the transmitter
Tap AS (we assume 5
o
for all)
Tap AoA
Tap AoD

doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 9
Cluster and Tap PAS Shape
Cluster and tap PAS follow Laplacian distribution.
Example of Laplacian AoA (AoD) distribution, cluster, AS = 30
o

doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 10
Cluster AoA and AoD
It was found in [3,4] that the relative cluster mean AoAs
have a random uniform distribution over all angles.
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 11
Cluster AS
We use the following findings to determine cluster AS:

In [3] the mean cluster AS values were found to be 21
o
and 25
o
for two
buildings measured. In [4] the mean AS value was found to be 37
o
. To be
consistent with these findings, we select the mean cluster AS values for
models A-E in the 20
o
to 40
o
range.

For outdoor environments, it was found that the cluster rms delay spread (DS)
is highly correlated (0.7 correlation coefficient) with the AS [9]. It was also
found that the cluster rms delay spread and AS can be modeled as correlated
log-normal random variables. We apply this finding to our modeling approach.
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 12
Cluster AS: Cont
The mean AS per model was determined using the formula (per model mean
AS values in the 20
o
40
o
range)




where DS is cluster delay spread.

Cluster AS variation within each model was determined using 0.7 correlation
with cluster DS and assuming log-normal distributions.
65 . 3 57 . 0 + = DS AS
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 13
Cluster AS: Cont
Resulting cluster AS (at the receiver) and DS for all five models (A-E) is
shown in the figure below

doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 14
Tap AS, AoA, and AoD
We assume that each tap PAS shape is Laplacian with AS = 5
o
.
Following constraints that satisfy cluster AS and AoA (AoD), tap AoA and
AoD can be determined using numerical methods.







where l
i
is a zero-mean, unit-variance Laplacian random variable, |
i
is a
scaling parameter related to the power roll-off coefficient of the cluster, A is a
parameter that is determined using numerical global search method to satisfy
the required AS and mean AoA of each cluster; o
o
is the mean cluster AoA;
o
2
tot
is cluster AS, and o
2
o,i
is tap AS.

=
A =
N
i
i
l
i
1
)
0
(
0
o | o
2
0
2
,
2
)
0
(
1
2
o
o
o o | o + A
=
=

i
i
l
N
i
i tot
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 15
Tap AS, AoA, and AoD: Cont

Tap
1
Tap
2
Tap
3 Tap
4
Tap
5
t
u
Example: Distribution of taps within a cluster.
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 16
MIMO Channel Model A: Table of Parameters

Tap
index
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Excess
delay
[ns]
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 110 140 170 200 240 290 340 390
Cluster 1
Power
[dB]
0 -0.9 -1.7 -2.6 -3.5 -4.3 -5.2 -6.1 -6.9 -7.8
-
9.071
2
-
11.19
91
-
13.79
54
-
16.39
18
-
19.37
10
-
23.20
17

Mean AoA =
154.4757
AoA
[]
166.6
46
172.6
334
156.1
558
150.0
347
148.4
607
109.7
505
121.8
078
152.7
446
171.0
199
155.2
886
156.0
954
159.6
128
154.2
316
149.2
625
154.3
86
153.8
697

Composite
AS =
18.4380
AS
[]
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Mean AoD =
333.7349
AoD
[]
346.8
507
320.9
888
345.5
986
292.1
785
342.3
962
350.6
262
311.2
92
349.5
338
336.1
867
326.1
379
350.5
996
353.7
7
349.6
664
19.25
42
359.4
043
325.5
16

Composite
AS = 19.7471
AS
[]
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Cluster 2
Power
[dB]

-
6.675
6
-
9.572
9
-
12.17
54
-
14.77
79
-
17.43
58
-
21.99
28
-
25.58
07

Mean AoA =
320.5062
AoA
[]
315.8
315.8
042
2.676
4
273.5
867
347.9
928
323.2
924
328.8
476

Composite
AS =
21.8956
AS
[]
5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Mean AoD =
50.3512
AoD
[]

68.67
51
27.43
82
47.14
56
15.64
74
50.40
85
39.56
65
52.11
88

Composite
AS = 20.4451
AS
[]
5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Cluster 3
Power
[dB]

-
18.84
33
-
23.23
81
-
25.24
63
-26.7
Mean AoA =
248.58
AoA
[]

239.5
305
238.1
292
251.7
416
322.5
986
Composite
AS =
24.6891
AS
[]
5 5 5 5
Mean AoD =
266.6654
AoD
[]

249.4
722
264.9
037
318.4
249
303.1
991
Composite
AS = 25.8612
AS
[]
5 5 5 5

doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 17
Next Steps
So far we have completely defined PAS of each tap (AS and
Laplacian AoA distribution) and AoA of each tap. These
parameters were determined so that the cluster AS and mean
cluster AoA requirements are met (experimentally
determined published results).
Next, we show how we use tap AoA and AS information to
calculate per tap transmit and receive antenna correlation
matrices and from that finally the MIMO channel matrices
H.
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 18
MIMO Channel Matrix Formulation
Example 4 x 4 MIMO matrix H for each tap is as follows








where X
ij
(i-th receiving and j-th transmitting antenna) are correlated zero-
mean, unit variance, complex Gaussian random variables as coefficients of the
Rayleigh matrix H
V
, exp(j|
ij
) are the elements of the fixed matrix H
F
, K is the
Ricean K-factor, and P is the power of each tap.









|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
(
(
(
(
(
(

+
+
(
(
(
(
(
(

+
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
+
+
=
44 43 42 41
34 33 32 31
24 23 22 21
14 13 12 11
1
1
1
1
1
1
44 43 42 41
34 33 32 31
24 23 22 21
14 13 12 11
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X
K
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
j
e
K
K
P
v
H
K
F
H
K
K
P H
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 19
MIMO Channel Matrix Formulation: Cont
To correlate the X
ij
elements of the matrix X, the following method can be used


4x4 MIMO channel transmit and receive correlation matrices are



| | | | | || |
2 / 1 2 / 1
tx
R
iid
H
rx
R X =
(
(
(
(
(
(

=
1
43 42 41
*
34
1
32 31
*
24
*
23
1
21
*
14
*
13
*
12
1
tx tx tx
tx tx tx
tx tx tx
tx tx tx
tx
R




(
(
(
(
(
(

=
1
43 42 41
*
34
1
32 31
*
24
*
23
1
21
*
14
*
13
*
12
1
rx rx rx
rx rx rx
rx rx rx
rx rx rx
rx
R




doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 20
MIMO Channel Matrix Formulation: Cont
Correlation coefficients for each tap can be determined using tap PAS (represented by
Laplacian distribution and corresponding AS) and tap AoA (AoD)











where D = 2td/ (for linear antenna array) and R
XX
and R
XY
are the cross-correlation
functions between the real parts (equal to the cross-correlation function between the
imaginary parts) and between the real part and imaginary part, respectively.

) ( ) ( D
XY
jR D
XX
R + =
}

=
t
t
| | | d PAS D D
XX
R ) ( ) sin cos( ) (
}

=
t
t
| | | d PAS D D
XY
R ) ( ) sin sin( ) (
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 21
MIMO Channel Matrix H Generation
Use power, AS, AoA and AoD tap parameters from tables
A-D.
Per tap, calculate transmit and receive correlation matrices.
Using correlation matrices and H
iid
generate instantiations
of channel matrices H, as many as required by simulation.

Matlab program that can be used to generate per tap H
matrices will be provided by Laurent Schumacher [10]
(most likely by May 2003).
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 22
Conclusion
WLAN MIMO channel models were developed based on
extensive published experimental data and models.
The models are based on per tap correlation matrices
determined from tap AS and AoA.
Matlab program will be provided that generates
instantiations of channel matrices H for each tap and
antenna combination.
doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/161r0a
Submission
March 2003
Vinko Erceg, Zyray Wireless; et al. Slide 23
References
[1] J. Medbo and P. Schramm, Channel models for HIPERLAN/2, ETSI/BRAN document no. 3ERI085B.
[2] A.A.M. Saleh and R.A. Valenzuela, A statistical model for indoor multipath propagation, IEEE J. Select. Areas
Commun., vol. 5, 1987, pp. 128-137.
[3] Q.H. Spencer, et. al., Modeling the statistical time and angle of arrival characteristics of an indoor environment,
IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 18, no. 3, March 2000, pp. 347-360.
[4] R.J-M. Cramer, R.A. Scholtz, and M.Z. Win, Evaluation of an ultra-wide-band propagation channel, IEEE Trans.
Antennas Propagat., vol. 50, no.5, May 2002, pp. 561-570.
[5] A.S.Y. Poon and M. Ho, Indoor multiple-antenna channel characterization from 2 to 8 GHz, submitted to ICC 2003
Conference.
[6] G. German, Q. Spencer, L. Swindlehurst, and R. Valenzuela, Wireless indoor channel modeling: Statistical agreement
of ray tracing simulations and channel sounding measurements, in proc. IEEE Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Proc.
Conf., vol. 4, 2001, pp. 2501-2504.
[7] J-G. Wang, A.S. Mohan, and T.A. Aubrey, Angles-of-arrival of multipath signals in indoor environments, in proc.
IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf., 1996, pp. 155-159.
[8] Chia-Chin Chong, David I. Laurenson and Stephen McLaughlin, Statistical Characterization of the 5.2 GHz
Wideband Directional Indoor Propagation Channels with Clustering and Correlation Properties, in proc. IEEE Veh.
Technol. Conf., vol. 1, Sept. 2002, pp. 629-633.
[9] K.I. Pedersen, P.E. Mogensen, and B.H. Fleury, A stochastic model of the temporal and azimuthal dispersion seen at
the base station in outdoor propagation environments, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 49, no. 2, March 2000, pp.
437-447.
[10] L. Schumacher, Namur University, Belgium, (laurent.schumacher@ieee.org).