Peak Power Headroom under FCC rules

1
Project IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless
Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title
Uncoordinated Deletion of Sub-Carriers in an
MB-OFDM Link Date Submitted 11 May,
2005 Source C. Razzell Company
Philips Address 1109, McKay Drive, San Jose,
CA 95131, USA Voice 1 408 474 7243, FAX ,
E-Mailcharles.razzell_at_philips.com Chiara
Cattaneo Company STMicroelectronics NV Address
39, Chemin du Champ-des-Filles, 1228 Geneva,
Plan-les-Quates, Switzerland Voice 41 22 929
29 94, FAX , E-Mailchiara.cattaneo_at_st.com
Re MB-OFDM Spectrum Flexibility Abstract Sim
ulated PER performance with uncoordinated
sub-carrier erasures Purpose Answer some no
comments questioning the practicality of
implementing sub-carrier deletion as an
interference mitigation technique. This document
provides an indication of the robustness of the
receiver to deletion of sub-carriers Notice This
document has been prepared to assist the IEEE
P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion
and is not binding on the contributing
individual(s) or organization(s). The material in
this document is subject to change in form and
content after further study. The contributor(s)
reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw
material contained herein. Release The
contributor acknowledges and accepts that this
contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may
be made publicly available by P802.15.
2
Introduction

• The following comments were received as part of
  the reason for not confirming MB-OFDM as the TG3a
  down-selections
• No data have been presented on how "nulling"
  tones or OFDM symbols impacts link performance
  (especially at the critical rate of 480 Mbps for
  USB-type applications)
• The following simulation results are intended to
  address this issue specifically.

3
Recap of MB-OFDM Spectrum Flexibility

• Ability to comply with worldwide regulations
• Channels and tones can be turned on/off
  dynamically to comply with changing regulations.
• Can arbitrarily shape spectrum in software with a
  resolution of 4 MHz.

4
CM1 PER performance _at_ 53.3Mbps
5
CM1 PER performance _at_ 200Mbps
6
CM1 PER performance _at_ 480Mbps
7
Summary

• Different numbers of adjacent sub-carriers were
  nulled 1,2,4,8 or 16
• The worst case, as expected was 480Mbps and 16
  sub-carriers nulled
• However, even with 16 x 4.12566MHz of spectrum
  cut away, the required SNR increased by less than
  1dB