Feature Wireless Technology


Small, powerful and aesthetic


Phil Sorsky at Commscope explores 4G network deployment as a major focus for mobile operators, in view of the technology being central to overcoming the ongoing capacity crunch and spawning future growth


hether it was Vodafone sending the world’s first text message way back in 1992 or the millions of sports fans that streamed videos, tweeted and uploaded photos via their tablets and mobile phones during the 2012 Olympic Games, Brits have always loved mobile technology. According to figures from Ofcom, the country now consumes more mobile data than any other nation, recently ousting the tech-loving Japanese as the smartphone and tablet revolution continues to juggernaut. In total, Ofcom suggests the average UK mobile subscriber uses 424MB of data each month. If we take the UK population aged 15 years and over at 52.1 millioni


W , and the fact that Ofcom


estimates two fifths (20,840,000) of this population currently owns a smartphoneii


, we can see that data use


stands at a staggering 8 billion, 836 million, 160 thousand MB per month! While this increased use of data has been welcomed by operators across the country, CEO’s are keeping a close eye on their networks to ensure they are able to cope with this increased demand. Central to this is addressing the provision of backhaul capacity to support ever-growing data traffic from small cells sprinkled across the country’s urban areas.


But choosing the right backhaul strategy is a difficult problem – and one that forces operators to tread a thin line between expenditure, technical per- formance and the needs of subscribers. Today’s subscribers have high expecta- tions and take uninterrupted coverage and unlimited capacity for granted. In order to meet these expectations, radio access networks must be supported by a backhaul system capable of transporting ever-growing data traffic.


Electronics SEPTEMBER 2013


“Microwave generally has been the technology of choice – providing an excellent combination of reliability, cost and rollout speed for network operators. In addition, in most cases backhaul will require switching from copper to either fibre or microwave because of the capacity required”


While microwave is not the only backhaul solution available, it can often be installed more quickly and at a lower cost. For this reason, microwave backhaul is seeing increased popularity amongst operators worldwide. This is further bolstered by the large capacity capabilities of the new microwave radios being released into the market. But this technology has a perceived problem – aesthetics. Network densification is undoubt- edly the most efficient way to improve capacity and support robust data


Sources: i: Ofcom


Communications Market Report ii: Telecomengine.com iii: CommScope


Typically, three technologies can be used for backhaul: copper cabling, fibre cabling or microwave links. Fibre is often the preferred option due to its high bandwidth, low latency and highly reliable technology. However, its relative cost and difficulty to install (for example, many urban areas restrict digging up streets and foot- paths) can be significant limitations. As a result, microwave generally has been the technology of choice – provid- ing an excellent combination of reliabil- ity, cost and rollout speed for network operators. In addition, in most cases backhaul will require switching from copper to either fibre or microwave because of the capacity required.iii


The roll-out of 4G has created a wave of capacity issues that has put


network opperators in search of a fitting solution


services. However, this capacity boost is most desired in areas that have high concentrations of subscribers who all want to access data services simultane- ously. Operators then find themselves in the unenviable position of needing to acquire many more cell sites in crowded urban areas where appropriate real estate for new base stations is extremely limited and very expensive. In order to ease this zoning process in such locations, it is paramount that antennas deployed in microwave networks be as small as possible while still being capable of transmitting the signal. To provide even more capacity, operators are increasingly turning to installing a small cell layer – using copper, fibre or microwave technology - on street furniture and buildings. Small cells can be designed for both external and in-building applications to which radio frequency (RF) signals are routed through fibre or copper cabling.


For those that choose microwave backhaul, they can be more easily installed in urban environments, but each small cell requires its own microwave backhaul link. The large numbers of these small cells being deployed results in a higher risk of signal interference in congested areas. Thus, it is critical for operators to deploy high-quality backhaul antennas that make the best use of the available spectrum and avoid interference as much as possible in order to obtain the best capacity and data throughput. For microwave to remain the best solution for backhaul the antennas should produce highly directional, point-to-point beams that generate minimal interference and are more immune to interference from other links – an issue that designers and engineers have been keen to address. Class 4 microwave antennas are best suited to achieving minimal signal degradation in the crowded airspace environment most operators face today. They improve throughput capacity by 40 percent and are robust enough to maintain optimal perform- ance well into the future.


Phil Sorsky is VP of Wireless Sales at Commscope


Small cells are being lauded as an excellent means to bolster network capacity regardless of the particular technologies or frequency bands they are chosen to configure, while main- taining the aesthetics of the environ- ment. Yet, the deployment of these technologies raises three major issues: site acquisition, power and backhaul. In the coming months operators will need to overcome these challenges if they are to create networks that can really match tomorrow’s capacity demands in a smaller package. Commscope www.commscope.com Enter 208


27


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44