Taking 5G from vision to reality

Taking 5G from Vision to Reality Moray Rumney

30th June 2014 Page 1 © 2014 Agilent Technologies

Taking 5G from

vision to reality

Moray Rumney

Strategic Business Development

30th June 2014

The 6th Future of Wireless International Conference

Changing the World with Wireless

30th June & 1st July 2014, The Møller Centre, Cambridge



In 1999 Agilent split off from Hewlett-Packard

In Nov 2014 the electronic measurement group of Agilent will

split off to become

The remainder fo Agilent will continue as a life sciences

company

Agilent to become two independent

companies



Abstract

The demands for innovation and future wireless connectivity

show no signs of abating. As a consequence, the expectations

for 5G - the next anticipated leap in wireless connectivity – are

quite staggering. This talk will examine the drivers for 5G and

take a deeper look at some of the potential new technologies

being researched with a view to understanding the many

dimensions, opportunities and contentions that 5G represents at

this early phase of its development. By drawing on the

experience gained from previous generations, the talk will

conclude with possible scenarios for what the wireless

ecosystem might look like by 2020.



Agenda

1. Review of major innovations in wireless communications

2. UMTS long term evolution

3. The motivation and vision for 5G

4. 5G technical assumptions

5. Six predictions for broadband wireless 2020

6. Summary



What have been the key innovations in

wireless communications to date?

GSM goes

global!

2G - 1993

Mobile voice

1G -1983

WLAN meets

the iPhone

2.75G - 2007 3.5 G - 2006

HSPA overtakes

EDGE

And looking forwards:

5G – 2020: The perception of infinite capacity anywhere!

http://codeatsociallywired.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/tortoise-and-hare.gif



TD-SCDMA (China)

802.16e (Mobile WiMAX)

WiBRO (Korea)

802.16d (Fixed WiMAX)

Wireless: 1990 to beyond 2020 GSM

(Europe) IS-136

(US TDMA) PDC

(Japan) IS-95A

(US CDMA)

HSCSD GPRS iMODE IS-95B (US CDMA)

W-CDMA (FDD & TDD)

E-GPRS (EDGE)

HSDPA HSUPA

EDGE Evolution

1x EV-DO 0 A B

HSPA+ / E-HSPA

LTE (R8/9 FDD/TDD)

LTE-Adv. (R10 and beyond)

802.16m / WiMAX2

802.11h/n

802.11ac

cdma2000 (1x RTT)

802.11a/g

802.11b 2G

2.5G

3G

3.5G

3.9G

4G

Market evolution Technology evolution

Inc

rea

sin

g e

fficie

nc

y, ba

nd

wid

th a

nd

da

ta ra

tes

© 2012 Agilent Technologies

5G 802.11ax

802.11ad

Cellular W-LAN

?



UMTS Long Term Evolution

1999

2015

Release Stage 3: Core

specs complete Main feature of Release

Rel-99 March 2000 UMTS 3.84 Mcps (W-CDMA FDD & TDD)

Rel-4 March 2001 1.28 Mcps TDD (aka TD-SCDMA)

Rel-5 June 2002 HSDPA

Rel-6 March 2005 HSUPA (E-DCH)

Rel-7 Dec 2007 HSPA+ (64QAM DL, MIMO, 16QAM UL). LTE & SAE Feasibility

Study, Edge Evolution

Rel-8 Dec 2008

LTE Work item – OFDMA air interface

SAE Work item – New IP core network

UMTS Femtocells, Dual Carrier HSDPA

Rel-9 Dec 2009

Multi-standard Radio (MSR), Dual Carrier HSUPA, Dual Band

HSDPA, SON, LTE Femtocells (HeNB)

LTE-Advanced feasibility study, MBSFN

Rel-10 March 2011 LTE-Advanced (4G) work item, CoMP Study

Four carrier HSDPA

Rel-11 Sept 2012 CoMP, eDL MIMO, eCA, MIMO OTA, HSUPA TxD & 64QAM

MIMO, HSDPA 8C & 4x4 MIMO, MB MSR

Rel-12 Sept 2014 3DL CA, LTE-Direct, Active Antenna Systems, small cells…

Rel-13 Dec 2015 Being defined from Sept 2014, LTE-U? 4 carrier aggregation?



LTE Frequency bands

By the end of Release 13 there could be 47 frequency bands

defined for LTE

FDD TDD

Release 8 1 – 17 (excl. 15,16*) 32 - 40

Release 9 18 - 21

Release 10 22 - 25 41 - 43

Release 11 26 - 29 44

Release 12 30 - 32

Release 13 1980-2010MHz & 2170-2200MHz Region 1,

1670-1675MHz Band for US,

AWS (Band 4) extension (study)

* Bands 15 and 16 are specified by ETSI only for use in Europe



Release 11, 12 &13 RAN stats

3GPP Releases 11, 12 and early 13 represent a huge

growth in features and complexity

• 58 Study items for feasibility of new work

• 75 new features (excl. carrier aggregation), 51 with new

performance requirements

• 129 new carrier aggregation combinations with corresponding

performance requirements

• 4 performance only requirements for features from earlier

releases

• 29 new conformance tests (expect ~180 at completion)



What is the motivation for 5G?

The primary motivation for 5G is the apparently endless

exponential growth in demand for wireless data services

In addition there is an emerging set of demands based on the

unique attributes of machine-type communications (MTC) for

the internet of things (IoT) which is predicted to reach tens of

billions of devices by 2020

There is also growing awareness of the need for energy

efficiency and cost savings



Shaping 5G: A complex problem

Performance-led metrics Identifiable metrics for higher performance

Higher bit rates

Lower latency

Higher spectral efficiency

Higher capacity density

Higher connection density

Leading to consequences for

Terminal and network cost

Terminal battery life

Energy efficiency

Reliability of service

Mobility



Shaping 5G: A complex problem

Availability and efficiency-led metrics Demands for availability and cost/energy efficiency

High availability of service

Lower terminal and network cost

Longer terminal battery life

Higher energy efficiency

Lower mobility

Leading to consequences on performance

Lower or sufficient bit rates

Higher latency

Lower spectral efficiency

Lower capacity density

Lower connection density



Performance vs.

availability, cost and

efficiency

The emerging

demands on 5G are

far more

comprehensive than

previous generations

It is very clear that

some fo the desirable

attributes are mutually

exclusive. This leads

to an assumption that

the needs of 5G

cannot be met by one

single solution

Shaping 5G High

Performance

Availability

cost and

efficiency

Bit rate

bits / s

109

107

105

103

UE battery life

days

103

102

10

1



High

Performance

Availability

cost and

efficiency

2G focussed on low bit

rate voice and SMS

services with low

spectral efficiency and

correspondingly high

availability at the cell

edge

2G targets Bit rate

bits / s

109

107

105

103



Later evolutions for

packet data (GPRS

and EDGE) traded off

higher efficiency to get

higher bit rates with

correspondingly lower

availability at the cell

edge

2.5G targets High

Performance

Availability

cost and

efficiency

Bit rate

bits / s

109

107

105

103



High

Performance

Availability

cost and

efficiency

The requirements for

high mobility 3G from

ITU-R (IMT-2000)

were less

comprehensive

covering just single-

user peak bit rates.

This is why early 3G

experiences did not

match up to the much

advertised 2 Mb/s low

mobility expectations.

3G targets Bit rate

bits / s

109

107

105

103



High

Performance

Availability

cost and

efficiency

The 4G targets

provided by ITU-R

were more

comprehensive than

3G by adding latency

and spectral efficiency

targets but otherwise

focussed again on

single-user peak data

rates at low mobility.

4G targets Bit rate

bits / s

109

107

105

103



High

Performance

Availability

cost and

efficiency

In the early debate on

5G some targets for

attributes associated

with high performance

have been proposed.

The consequences on

the attributes of

availability, cost and

efficiency using

today’s technology

then follow

A better balance

between the upper

and lower halves of

the plot will require

technical breakthrough

5G High performance

targets

Bit rate

bits / s

109

107

105

103

UE battery life

days

103

102

10

1



High

Performance

Availability

cost and

efficiency

By contrast the

contrasting demands

of static MTC/IoT look

very different

The key attributes are

driven from the lower

half of the spider

diagram with the likely

performance attributes

being impacted

MTC/IoT targets

Bit rate

bits / s

109

107

105

103

UE battery life

days

103

102

10

1



High

Performance

Availability

cost and

efficiency

Looking at public

safety a further

difference emerges in

priorities

The consequence of

the contrasting targets

for 5G means there

will need to be more

than one technical

solution

Public safety

targets

Bit rate

bits / s

109

107

105

103

UE battery life

days

103

102

10

1



High

Performance

Availability

cost and

efficiency

By overlaying the

contrasting demands

of different types of

service an aggregate

picture of 5G emerges.

Could this be 5G?

Bit rate

bits / s

109

107

105

103

UE battery life

days

103

102

10

1



Setting the 5G agenda

The role of the ITU If the industry were left to its own

devices two possibilities might emerge

LTE would continue to evolve with an ever-increasing list of

incremental developments with the risk of creating a complex

infrastructure with a fragmented market

The conflicting demands on 5G might lead to a never-ending

debate or, national or regional solutions that risk market

fragmentation

For 5G to be successful it needs to have a clear focus and

timeline – this should be the role of the ITU in the successor to

the IMT-2000 and IMT-Advanced programs

http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-R/study-groups/rsg5/rwp5d/imt-2020



Setting the 5G agenda

Other organizations In addition to the ITU there are currently many organizations across

the world with an interest in 5G research including:

Japan - ARIB 2020 ad hoc group

Korea - 5G Forum

China - IMT2020 and Beyond promotion group

Europe - Horizon 2020 funded research program

• 5G Public Private Partnership (5GPPP) is a Horizon 2020 program

UK The 5G Innovation Centre based at Surrey University

Germany – Technical University of Dresden Industrial Partners

US - New York University Wireless consortium

Global – Next Generation Mobile Networks (NGMN) operator group



5G Timing

There is a general recognition that 5G is targeting commercial

deployment beyond 2020

There are also national / regional pressures to demonstrate

capability for flagship events such as the Korean 2018 Winter

Olympics and the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympics

That said, if the timescales of previous generations which had

much simpler objectives were to be repeated, then commercial

launch in 2020 is a seriously aggressive goal

However, for the time being, 2020 is the date motivating 5G

research



5G solution proposals

There are many potential solutions proposed for 5G, but given

the desire for orders of magnitude of change in performance,

cost etc. most of the marginal ideas can be discounted

Only the solutions that truly could make a huge difference need

to be considered, the rest can be left to the ongoing evolution of

legacy systems



A simple wireless capacity model

The capacity of a system to deliver services is defined by three

main factors:

• The bandwidth of the available radio spectrum – in MHz

• The efficient use of that spectrum – bits / second / hertz

• The number of cells – this equates to spectrum reuse

Number of cells

Eff

icie

ncy



Wireless capacity growth

1960 – 2010

Capacity 1,000,000x

Gro

wth

facto

r

1

10

100

1000

20 25

2000

Efficiency Spectrum No. of cells

10000

Gro

wth

po

ten

tial

1

10

3 2

100


100

2010 – 2020

Capacity 600x

For both the past and the future, the growth of wireless capacity is

dominated by the number of cells (small cell spectrum reuse)

Most

industry effort

Most

opportunity



Wireless capacity growth: with mmWave spectrum

Gro

wth

po

ten

tial

1

10

2

20

100


100

2015 – 2025

Capacity 4000x

But with potential for mmWave deployment, the available spectrum

might rise from a typical 500 MHz per region to many GHz



5G Technical Assumptions

Use of mmWave frequencies 10G-50GHz, 60 GHz, possibly 70-80 GHz.

Wider bandwidths: 500MHz to 3GHz (below 50 GHz)

Massive MIMO – 100+ elements

New antenna technologies

• Steerable Array antennas (dynamic beam forming patterns)

• Massive MIMO (e.g. 100-1000 low-power antennas per BTS

Will require significantly more (low cost) backhaul capacity (400 Gb/s)

Very low round-trip latency requirements

• Affects all elements of the network

Higher Frequencies and Higher Densities will dictate small cells

Software defined radio and network



5G Technical Assumptions

New air interfaces

• Move towards more cognitive designs to take advantage of spectrum sharing: a hybrid of

cellular mobility and Wi-Fi ad hoc co-existence

Interop and integration with multiple RAT’s including unlicensed

• Significant impact on the network (e.g. control channel on low band)

• Role of 802.11ad as it evolves between now and 2020 into 802.11ax



Why mmWave? Challenge & Opportunity

𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑅𝑋 = 𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑇𝑋 + 𝐴𝑛𝑡𝐺𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑅𝑋 + 𝐴𝑛𝑡𝐺𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑇𝑋 − 20𝑙𝑜𝑔10 4𝜋𝑅 - 20𝑙𝑜𝑔10𝑓

𝑐

In words. For a given distance, as the frequency increases, the received power will

drop unless offset by an increase in some combination of transmit power, transmit

antenna gain, and receive antenna gain.

The decrease in power as a function of frequency is

caused by the decrease in the antenna aperture.

IBM 94 GHz Array Can Tile for Larger Arrays

IBM Press Release, June 2013

Distance Frequency

The Good News:

• Higher frequency antennas elements are smaller

• Easier to assemble into electronically steered arrays

• Reduced interference. Energy goes where it’s needed

• Improve performance in dense crowds (5G goal)

• Higher frequencies wider bandwidths: faster (5G goal)

Challenges:

• Increased complexity with more elements

• Multiple antenna arrays required for spherical coverage

• Discovery and Tracking (mobile devices)



2D Massive MIMO free space simulation

Four users, 0 dB relative BS power



2D Massive MIMO scattering simulation

Four users, -5.6 dB relative BS power



2D Massive MIMO random scattering

200 ant, 1λ, -14.5 dB relative BS power



Mobility and the challenge of directional

antennas

It becomes a bit like making one’s

way through a thicket at night with

a laser pointer when a broad

beamed flashlight is needed.

Steve Wilkus

Search Strategies

High Gain

Large volume to search, low probability of

both stations pointing in the same direction

Low Gain

Higher probability of looking in the right

direction but much less energy to detect



Potential 5G mmWave bands

Samsung Experiments: 28 and 38 GHz

(500 MHz)

Japan: Tokyo Institute of Tech. 11 GHz,

400 MHz

(some collaboration with NTT DoCoMo)

METIS: Bands for investigation - see chart

Samsung

METIS

Samsung



mmWave Design Challenges

High Frequency High Bandwidth High Path Loss High Data Rate

Phase Stability High IF to

Converters (use 2nd

Nyquist)

Directional Antennas

Usually Required

Power consumption

Amplifier Efficiency I and Q channel

match over

frequency

Large codebook

space for Beam

Steering

Algorithm Complexity

Output Power Integrated Noise

Power

Beam forming

complexity

Prototyping (FPGA’s

usually not fast

enough)

Antenna Complexity Harder to doge

spurious

Robust Modulation

and Coding (MCS)

IO (memory,

interfaces to CPU’s

etc.)

Quadrature Errors

(Homodyne)

A/D and D/A

Converters

(power consumption)

Discovery and

Tracking affect MAC

and MCS

High sample-rate

data to/from

converters



Six predictions for wireless broadband 2020

1. No new worldwide allocations of mmWave spectrum

2. Cellular will extend into the ISM band at 60 GHz (Unlicensed

access)

3. The importance of UE antennas will finally be recognized

4. WLAN will become an equal partner with cellular

5. Without technical breakthrough, the operator business case

will not support a massive expansion in capacity

6. The success of 802.11ad will determine the likelihood of

cellular at mmWave frequencies



1 No new worldwide allocations of mmWave

spectrum One of the yet to be addressed challenges for 5G is where potential mmWave spectrum might be found

The last time the ITU Worlds Radio Council allocated spectrum for wireless communications was 2007, there was no debate at WRC 2012.

In 2015 there is an agenda item for communications below 6 GHz but no guarantee fo any new allocations

There is not yet an agenda item agreed for WRC 2018/9 to discuss potential mmWave allocations

Existing spectrum holders from military, Broadcast, Satellite industries are acting together to prevent further release to mobile broadband



2 Cellular will extend into the ISM band at 60

GHz (Unlicensed access) Release 13 will study the operation f LTE in unlicensed spectrum

(LTE-U) - in particular the 5 GHz ISM band used for WLAN

This is to enable operators to offload traffic to LTE femtocells without

having to implement WLAN thus avoiding inter-RAT challenges

Proposals are controversial since standard LTE interferes with WLAN

LTE is shown to be more efficient - but WLAN was there first

Modifications to the LTE air interface are proposed to make co-

existence with WLAN more tolerable (e.g. Listen Before Talk – LBT)

Likely to become the single biggest increase of cellular spectrum (up

to 680 MHz in 5 GHz band) since the allocations given at WRC 07.

If successful at 5 GHz, likely to be extended to the 60 GHz ISM band

as the quickest way for 5G to get spectrum



3 The importance of antennas will finally be

recognized

Step 1 Measure with a micrometer

Once conducted signals reach RF, allowances for

implementation margin and test system uncertainty

can account for 2 or 3 dB lost performance

Features providing a few

tenths of a dB of baseband

performance are considered

worth fighting for

But the radiated performance of devices

taking into account the antennas can

easily vary by 10 dB or more

Step 2 Mark with chalk

Step 3 Cut with an axe



mmWave Antenna Development and

Validation

• Antenna Performance

– Steerable: design, characterization (codebook), producibility

– Beam forming: Reciprocity, Gain/Phase/TDD elements

• Traceable Measurements

– Challenging without facility for conducted measurements

– Integrated Power: Varies with radiation pattern

– Receiver Sensitivity

• Interoperability with steerable antennas (MAC and PHY)

• Test Modes

– Start or Stop steering/beamforming

– Select test pattern

– Use test-only DUT configurations to simplify parametric measurements, and to aid in isolating performance issues of individual antenna subsystems or elements.



RF MIMO OTA Multi-probe anechoic chamber



2007

4 WLAN will become an equal partner with

cellular

Brief history of cellular

carriers & WiFi

2012

No longer a threat

No longer not good enough



Evolution of carrier aggregation

Release-10 Co-located The original goal of CA was to increase

the spectrum and hence peak data

rate available from one cell site

Two carriers in the same band

with very similar coverage area

Two carriers of different frequencies

showing different coverage areas

When the second carrier is

at a very different frequency,

the benefit of CA is limited to the

centre of the cell which is not ideal




Rel-12 Dual connectivity for LTE By allowing CA between sites it is possible to provide

continuous CA coverage using a low frequency

macro (umbrella) cell and local capacity

using a higher frequency small cell

Macro umbrella cell

Small

cell Small

cell

Small

cell

The separation of the sites means

that enhancements are required at the

physical layer including multiple timing advances




Rel-13 Multi-RAT dual connectivity The ultimate flexibility is then achieved if CA is performed

across radio access technologies (RATs) and

in particular with today’s dominant small

cell technology: WLAN.

Macro umbrella cell

Small

cell WLAN

WLAN

This level of integration

will force solutions to the issues

of authentication and billing which

continue to limit the potential of WLAN today.



5 Without technical breakthrough, the

operator business case will not support a

massive expansion in capacity

The predictions for exponential traffic growth assume the

provision of the necessary network capacity is affordable

Current wireless broadband experience is dominated by a lack

of investment in current technology rather than a need for new

technology



At the conference

Churchill College

No 3G coverage in the

auditorium

EDGE



6 The success of 802.11ad will predict the

likelihood of cellular at mmWave

Cellular at mmWave will face all of the challenges of WirelessHD and

802.11ad and many more. 802.11ad will be seven years old in 2020 and

its success will be a barometer for what is possible with mmWave cellular

802.11ad ASIC’s are available

now and shipping in quantity

Peraso

Wilocity

WirelessHD has been available to

consumers for several years

IOGear Wireless HD - £189 at Amazon

The future is already here, it’s just not evenly distributed.

William Gibson



Summary

The current wireless broadband ecosystem is

becoming increasingly fragmented and complex with

implications on performance and costs

For 5G to deliver a revolutionary step and distinguish

itself from the ongoing evolution of 4G will require

breakthrough developments

Unlike previous mobile communication generations,

the debate around 5G is embracing the full range of

technical performance, economic and environmental

factors



But as engineers we should not forget that

the “best” designs don’t always win!

Ethernet vs. Token ring

802.11b vs. HiperLAN

Windows 3.1 vs. Unix

Iridium vs. GSM

Esperanto vs. English

“Perfection is the enemy of the good” Gustave Flaubert

French Novelist 1821 - 1880



Thank you for listening!