Comparison between LTE and Rival Wireless Technologies (using Opnet 16)

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Comparison between LTE and Rival Wireless Technologies (using Opnet 16)"

Benedict Higgins
6 years ago
Views:

1 ENSC 427: COMMUNICATION NETWORKS SPRING 2013 Comparison between LTE and Rival Wireless Technologies (using Opnet 16) Team 10: Josh Ancill Kim Izmaylov Anton Khomutskiy 1

- Long Term Evolution - 4G (4 th Generation 3GPP standard) - Successor to UMTS/HSPA+ (3G) () - Uses OFDMA on DL (Orthogonal frequency-division multiple access) and Single Channel FDMA

2 - Long Term Evolution - 4G (4 th Generation 3GPP standard) - Successor to UMTS/HSPA+ (3G) () - Uses OFDMA on DL (Orthogonal frequency-division multiple access) and Single Channel FDMA on UL - Higher capacity, lower latency, simplified architecture and higher data transfer rate Mbit/s DL and 50 Mbit/s UL (1x1) - Up to 300 Mbit/s DL and 70 Mbit/s UL (4x4 MIMO) 2

16-2009: Up to 80 Mbit/s DL and 40 Mbit/s UL (1x1) - 802.

3 Rival Technologies -Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX) : Up to 80 Mbit/s DL and 40 Mbit/s UL (1x1) g (highest supported in Opnet 16.0): up to 54 Mbit/s n (current version): up to 150 Mbit/s (1x1) 3

4 Choosing a modulation scheme 4

5 Wi-Fi Network Setup 5

6 Wi-Fi Scenario Setup Key setup parameters (defaults not mentioned) Application Wi-Fi version AP Transmit Power AP Buffer Size Mobile Node Transmit Power Modified Video Conference. Custom incoming frame size (increasing linearly with time) defined in a FSI (frame size index) file. Small outgoing frame size g with 54 Mbps (latest in Opnet) 1.0 W 1024 Kbits 0.1 W Mobile Node Buffer Size 1024 Kbits 6

7 WiMAX Network Setup SS: Subscriber Station 7

Application Bandwidth Efficiency mode Service class SS and BS Classifier definition WiMAX Scenario Setup SS (DL and UL) service flow service class Key setup parameters (defaults not mentioned)

8 Application Bandwidth Efficiency mode Service class SS and BS Classifier definition WiMAX Scenario Setup SS (DL and UL) service flow service class Key setup parameters (defaults not mentioned) Modified Video Conference. Custom incoming frame size (increasing linearly with time) defined in a FSI (frame size index) file. Small outgoing frame size. 20 MHz Efficiency Enabled (No physical layer simulation) Video Class, using rtps scheduling All traffic is assigned to the Video Service class Video Class SS DL Modulation 64-QAM 5/6 SS UL Modulation QPSK 3/4 SS ARQ BS Maximum Transmit Power SS Maximum Transmit Power ARQ and HARQ (Hybrid ARQ) enabled 10 W 0.5 W 8

9 LTE Network Setup - UE: User Equipment - enodeb: Evolved Node B (base station) - EPC: Evolved Packet Core 9

10 LTE Scenario Setup Application Bandwidth Efficiency mode EPS Bearer TFT Packet Filters Key setup parameters (defaults not mentioned) Modified Video Conference. Custom incoming frame size (increasing linearly with time) defined in a FSI (frame size index) file. Small outgoing frame size. 20 MHz Physical Enabled (Simulate everything) Video Bearer, non-gbr (Guaranteed BitRate) All traffic is assigned to the Video Bearer UE Modulation MCS Index = 28 enb Maximum Transmit Power 10 W UE Maximum Transmit Power 0.5 W 10

11 This script generates a Frame Size Index (.csv) file that defines linearly increasing traffic flows. Generating the traffic 11

become congested at about 28 Mbit/s - The 3 Mbit/s video stream

12 Wi-Fi Results Traffic flows per mobile node (total of 5 mobile nodes): Blue: 0 to 3 Mbit/s Red: 0 to 10 Mbit/s - Wi-Fi starts to become congested at about 28 Mbit/s - The 3 Mbit/s video stream did not fully utilize Wi-Fi downlink bandwidth Green: 0 to 25 Mbit/s 12

starts to become congested at about 63 Mbit/s - The 3 Mbit/s and

13 WiMAX Results Traffic flows per SS (total of 5 SSs): Blue: 0 to 3 Mbit/s Red: 0 to 10 Mbit/s Green: 0 to 25 Mbit/s - WiMAX starts to become congested at about 63 Mbit/s - The 3 Mbit/s and 10 Mbit/s video stream did not fully utilize WiMAX downlink bandwidth 13

its maximum global throughput at about 92 Mbit/s - The 3 Mbit/s

14 LTE Results Traffic flows per UE (total of 5 UEs): Blue: 0 to 3 Mbit/s Red: 0 to 10 Mbit/s Green: 0 to 25 Mbit/s - LTE achieves its maximum global throughput at about 92 Mbit/s - The 3 Mbit/s and 10 Mbit/s video streams did not fully utilize LTE downlink bandwidth 14

much longer than the other technologies - WiMAX video throughput drops to ~0 Kbit/s

15 Comparison of Cross Technology Results Results produced using 0-25 Mbit/s Technology: Blue: LTE Red: Wi-Fi Green: WiMAX - LTE maintains its throughput for much longer than the other technologies - WiMAX video throughput drops to ~0 Kbit/s - Wi-Fi has the smallest delay throughout the simulation until WiMAX throughput drops to ~0 15

throughput throughout the simulation as opposed to WiFi - Wi-Fi and WiMAX

16 Comparison of Cross Technology Results Results produced using 0-10 Mbit/s Technology: Blue: LTE Red: Wi-Fi Green: WiMAX - LTE and WiMAX maintain its throughput throughout the simulation as opposed to WiFi - Wi-Fi and WiMAX have lower latency at low throughput but LTE wins at higher throughputs 16

17 Conclusions - LTE s maximum throughput seen in simulation is 92 Mbit/s DL, which is near theoretical values (100 Mbit/s) - Given that all technologies in our simulation use 20 MHz channels, LTE has the highest spectrum efficiency based on the simulation results showing higher sustained data rates - LTE has lower latency than WiMAX, comparable to WiFi - Based on the above LTE is superior to other technologies 17

18 References [1] M. Abdullah and A. Yonis, "Performance of LTE Release 8 and Release 10 in wireless communications," in Cyber Security, Cyber Warfare and Digital Forensic (CyberSec), [2] M. Nohrborg, "LTE," 3GPP, [Online]. Available: Acronyms/LTE. [Accessed 10 February 2013]. [3] C. Y. Yeoh, "Experimental study of n network," in The 12th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), [4] B. McWilliams, Y. Le Pezennec and G. Connins, "HSPA+ (2100 MHz) vs LTE (2600 MHz) spectral efficiency and latency comparison," in XVth International Telecommunications Network Strategy and Planning Symposium (NETWORKS), [5] C. Krapichler, "LTE, HSPA and Mobile WiMAX a comparison of technical performance," in Institution of Engineering and Technology Hot Topics Forum: LTE vs WiMAX and Next Generation Internet, [6] WiMAX Forum, "WiMAX and the IEEE m Air Interface Standard - April 2010," [Online]. Available: [Accessed 1st April 2013]. 18

ANALYSIS OF LTE VS. WIMAX

ANALYSIS OF LTE VS. WIMAX ENSC 427, SPRING 2013, TEAM #08 NG Jackie, 301056206 (jna10@sfu.ca) ZHU Wangyi (Nick), 301159678 (wangyiz@sfu.ca) RAJARATANAM Sutharsan, 200081017 (srajara1@sfu.ca) OVERVIEW INTRODUCTION