University of Oulu

K. B. Shashika Manosha, K. Hiltunen, M. Matinmikko-Blue and M. Latva-Aho, "Performance Comparison of Alternative Indoor 5G Micro-Operator Deployments in 3.6-GHz and 26-GHz Bands," in IEEE Transactions on Cognitive Communications and Networking, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 886-899, Dec. 2019. doi: 10.1109/TCCN.2019.2929151

Performance comparison of alternative indoor 5G micro-operator deployments in 3.6 GHz and 26 GHz bands

Saved in:
Author: Manosha, K. B. Shashika1; Hiltunen, K.2; Matinmikko-Blue, M.1;
Organizations: 1Centre for Wireless Communications, University of Oulu, Finland
2Ericsson Research, Oy L M Ericsson Ab, Finland
Format: article
Version: accepted version
Access: open
Online Access: PDF Full Text (PDF, 1.5 MB)
Persistent link:
Language: English
Published: IEEE Communications Society, 2019
Publish Date: 2019-12-11


The fifth generation (5G) networks will provide local high-quality wireless services, especially within indoor areas. New local 5G network operator models, such as the recently introduced micro-operators, are increasingly important for vertical specific service delivery. The emergence of 5G micro-operator networks in spatially confined areas depends on local spectrum availability. In this paper, we investigate the performance of local 5G indoor micro-operator networks in the 3.6-GHz and 26-GHz bands. We consider two uncoordinated time-division duplex networks in adjacent buildings sharing the same channel with different base station antenna configurations and deployment densities. We evaluate the resulting performance of the victim network via system simulations. We have observed that the center frequency does not significantly impact the downlink performance unless the network is noise-limited. However, the uplink performance in 26-GHz band is affected by higher coupling losses between the base stations and mobile terminals. Our results indicate that beamforming and wider bandwidths help to improve the performance in 26-GHz band. More importantly, two indoor micro-operators can successfully coexist with a very small separation distance in the 26-GHz band, while in the 3.6-GHz band, a considerably larger isolation between the networks is required, for example, in the form of a much larger separation distance.

see all

Series: IEEE transactions on cognitive communications and networking
ISSN: 2372-2045
ISSN-E: 2332-7731
ISSN-L: 2372-2045
Volume: 5
Issue: 4
Pages: 886 - 899
DOI: 10.1109/TCCN.2019.2929151
Type of Publication: A1 Journal article – refereed
Field of Science: 213 Electronic, automation and communications engineering, electronics
Funding: This research has been financially supported by Business Finland in uO5G project and Academy of Finland in 6Genesis Flagship (grant 318927).
Academy of Finland Grant Number: 318927
Detailed Information: 318927 (Academy of Finland Funding decision)
Copyright information: © 2019 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works.