Jump to content

Pitfalls of Carrier Aggregation


bigsnake49

Recommended Posts

A pretty nice article by Sue Marek on the pitfalls and lessons of Carrier Aggregation:

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/lte-advanced-carrier-aggregations-pitfalls-are-few-and-far-between/2014-06-11

 

The main points are that carrier aggregation eats up battery life (I say no more or less than contiguous band of equal MHz), and that in the case of inter band aggregation, the subcarrier assignment to each band. We have talked about both points on this site.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A pretty nice article by Sue Marek on the pitfalls and lessons of Carrier Aggregation:

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/lte-advanced-carrier-aggregations-pitfalls-are-few-and-far-between/2014-06-11

 

The main points are that carrier aggregation eats up battery life (I say no more or less than contiguous band of equal MHz), and that in the case of inter band aggregation, the subcarrier assignment to each band. We have talked about both points on this site.

 

You're forgetting the most important part where they're saying these issues can be reduced by proper network optimizations and fine-tuning.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I at one point was very concerned about this, however I think that the race to sleep also has benefits on the network side. In other words, carrier aggregation can provide a better experience. It isn't merely about e-wang whipping. It's about delivering far more capacity. The newer 20 nm network chipsets should be able to deal with 3 carrier aggregation just fine.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I at one point was very concerned about this, however I think that the race to sleep also has benefits on the network side. In other words, carrier aggregation can provide a better experience. It isn't merely about e-wang whipping. It's about delivering far more capacity. The newer 20 nm network chipsets should be able to deal with 3 carrier aggregation just fine.

what chip set is currently being used? Why wouldn't the 3 or 4 different companies (samsung etc.) be installing them from the start of nv?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what chip set is currently being used? Why wouldn't the 3 or 4 different companies (samsung etc.) be installing them from the start of nv?

Because Qualcomm has the best overall performance and RF package, not to mention they support legacy CDMA.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because Qualcomm has the best overall performance and RF package, not to mention they support legacy CDMA.

They have 64% of the market by revenue with the rest of them splitting the 36%.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what chip set is currently being used? Why wouldn't the 3 or 4 different companies (samsung etc.) be installing them from the start of nv?

I'm talking of handsets.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • It’s a neat and seemingly valid / effective strategy that, at least from my understanding, is only really used by VZW
    • Those are usually left over from the initial AWS deployment, so all run B13/B66 with support for BC0/BC1 (although that’s been shut off on most sites). No NR. Sites with the later Ericsson radios got an OTA update and broadcast B2. On those sites, a B5 OTA update was also available (and tested), but ultimately rolled back. Putting up all that power/spectrum severely degraded the B13 output.  The site atop Crystal Mountain is another story and uses the same setup as the site on the ridge near Neilton. These antennas were selected for their vertical beamwidth. Most modern directional antennas have small vertical beamwidths and would require extreme downtilt to cover the road next to a steep ridge. Thus, they would have a severely limited coverage footprint beyond the road. Omnis can be a better choice in these instances, especially when there’s LoS to the coverage objective (since they’ll generally have lower gain figures). Omnis also don’t run in to the horizontal sector edge problem, which can be difficult to optimize for with directional antennas that have complex or irregular 3D gain profiles. That’s why on a lot of sites on mountains, you’ll see wider antennas used. For example, the Verizon site on Joyce Ridge has three sectors with 80-degree HBW antennas. 
    • Do you know what RAN is behind those Omni's? LTE (bands?) are they pushing any NR through them? Very curious   edit: I guess I could check cellmapper etc but you might know more nuance!
    • N41 here has been expanded from 140Mhz to 180Mhz.  Speeds seem the same so they just need to work on backhaul
    • I noticed today that T-mobile has shut of B41 LTE in the Louisville area and widened the 2nd n41 carrier to 80MHz. That just leaves them with 5x5 B12, 10x10 B2, and two 10x10 B66 carriers on LTE, everything else is in NR (besides their 2G network). They have 20x20 n71, 20x20 n25, 5x5 n25, and 180MHz n41. 
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...