Wi-Fi Design Strategies in a Converged World Webinar: Your Questions Answered.

We had an amazing webinar on “Wi-Fi Design Strategies in a Converged World”. Our guest speaker Ronald van Kleunen, CEO of Globeron did a great job discussing why it’s important to understand the impact of convergence while designing high‑performing Wi‑Fi networks and how different wireless technologies can work together.

As promised Ronald, along with iBwave’s Vladan Jevremovic and Ali Jemmali took some time to answer most of the questions that were asked by our enthusiastic audience. This is the first in a series of blog posts where we will share these answer with you. So read on and feel free to comment and share your feedback.

And in case you missed this webinar or simply need a refresher, here is a link to the recording: Wi-Fi Design Strategies Webinar.

This week’s topic: Wi-Fi Design

1- How do you verify the design after implementation?

[Ronald]

RF Coverage validation can be done in iBwave Wi-Fi with the Site Survey tool (there is a Passive and an Active Survey option).

  • Passive means the Wi-Fi adapter is not connected to a network and visualizes RF coverage areas of different SSIDs (Service Set Identifiers) called an “RF Heatmap”
  • Active means, the adapter is connected to an AP (“BSSID – Basic Service Set IDentifier”, like a Single AP) or to an SSID (which can exist out of multiple APs covering an RF network)

To validate RF Capacity is a bit more difficult, there are some “Wi-Fi client simulators” creating multiple clients to connect to the AP (to test the capacity of the clients associating, throughput tests, etc.). Alternatively, real clients can be used, but this is very costly.

2- What are the expected trends of Wi-Fi design in the context of future 5G?

[Ronald]

Currently 5G is a hot topic for both outdoor and indoor “small cells” architectures for cellular and mobile devices, but one of the difficulties in many countries is the availability of the 5G Spectrum (700 MHz) and the auction model’s governments will implement for operators to bid-on. As an example, Singapore is one of the first countries that gave spectrum to do trials for 5G. Note that Spectrum management does not mandate the technology used in the assigned spectrum.

Both technologies will co-exist for several reasons:

  • Price (Wi-Fi / unlicensed spectrum = cheap vs 5G / licensed is expensive)
  • Adoption/Developers, more developers with Wi-Fi enabled equipment vs 5G (think about IoT over Wi-Fi, versus IoT over 5G)
  • Public wireless networks might be preferred by 5G, because of better roaming / coverage (e.g. over a country) vs Wi-Fi being limited in RF coverage and roaming options
  • Enterprises probably will stick to Wi-Fi for their own production network and operations, because of confidentiality of data to remain within the facility and not going via the DataCenters of the Telco providers

3- I want to know the weak, strong areas of the AP ‘s coverage

[Ronald]

Vladan of iBwave did an excellent presentation how to use iBwave Wi-Fi from an RF Design perspective (Ref: overcoming the capacity challenge available via this webinar link) , but also the survey tool will help to find the weak areas.

4- Capacity Planning & Channel/frequency Planning

[Ronald]

Yes this is covered for Wi-Fi and can be automated in the iBwave Wi-Fi tool for areas/zones, number of active devices and applications (e.g. e-mail and data requirements,voice requirements, etc.) it is very detailed.

Vladan of iBwave did an excellent presentation how to use iBwave Wi-Fi from an RF Design perspective (Ref: overcoming the capacity challenge available via this webinar link) , but also the survey tool will help to find the weak areas.

5- How do I design for capacity instead of coverage of Wi-Fi? How do 2×2:2, 3×3:3 or 4×4:4 APs differ in designing for capacity?

[Ronald]

Capacity – see Vladan’s webinar as he covered the RF capacity planning ((Ref: overcoming the capacity challenge available via this webinar link)

[Vladan / Ali]

2×2:2, 3×3:3 and 4×4:4 are different focusing on the spatial streams and Tx and Rx radios for max. DATARATES only  (thus not throughput as many factors impact the throughput). Streams to be used depends on the client as well what their capabilities are. To design, these APs need to be in the iBwave Wi-Fi tool which takes into account the Antenna RF propagation.

6- How accurate/ feasible is it to design networks without being physically present in the site?

[Ronald]

The RF planning tools can plan till a certain extent (including wall attenuation levels, etc.), but what cannot be planned in advance are:

  • Neighboring buildings with Wi-Fi and non-Wi-Fi devices operating in the same spectrum
  • Other devices in the building (e.g. Microwave ovens in 2.4GHz)
  • Other equipment in the building (e.g. metal cabinets, racks in a warehouse, storing different products at shelves in a supermarket)
  • People walking around the facility.

7- How does RF mapping gets affected by different flavors of Wi-Fi (802.11n, ac , ah etc…).

[Ronald]

In the RF mapping / planning tool, the way the technology works (like number of spatial streams, bandwidth 20 MHz, 40 MHz, 80 MHz, Transmit Output power settings of the AP, etc., protocol used) are all kind of variables impacting the RF propagation and RF Heatmap visualization (but there are more factors affecting it, like number of APs on the same channel, building materials like concrete walls, etc.).

8- How to remove Co-Channel Interference and how to measure it?

[Ronald]

Proper channel planning is important, but eventually multiple APs will be on the same channel (Co-Channel interference). SNR (Signal to Noise Ratio) is one of the factors for client devices to decide to which AP to connect to, but there are more factors (4x conditions: Physical Carrier Sense, Virtual Carrier Sense, IFS completed and Random Back-off Timer / Slots completed).

Adjacent Channel interference (overlapping channels is worse) as the APs cannot hear each other and therefor Co-Channel interface is a bit better as the Wi-Fi frame can be interpreted by the other devices on the channel. Furthermore, take into account Client Induced Interference as these are also radio transmitters and can affect the communication of other APs / devices on the same channel.

To measure Co-Channel interference:

  • Spectrum Analyzers
  • Reconnaissance tools
  • Protocol Analyzers
  • Integrated Site survey tools

9- During the recorded demo, you went from your predictive plan straight to installation, then conducted a verification survey afterwards. Would you not do a pre-deployment survey as well to collect surrounding passive data and confirm your predictive AP locations are correct within a live environment? (in case live propagation differs to your prediction).

[Ronald]

Correct (the demo was a bit focusing on key aspects), but you are right, that need to be added to video. The RF planning is done, but you always need to go on-site to understand the environment as it is always different than expected. Also, measurements need to be done to check the wall types and attenuation levels, leakage of neighboring buildings Wi-Fi networks, furniture in the office (like metal cabinets), other equipment operating in the same frequencies (like microwave ovens).

10- What are the main criteria to design a Wi-Fi network, is there a specific standard or a table showing different Service Levels?

[Ronald]

No there is not, as covered in the presentation there are several organizations involved in standardization and in progress for Wi-Fi networks by the WLAN Association (WLA)

In general, the approach works for any wireless network

  • Get the requirements (end-users, # devices, roaming, costs, etc.) “Red book”
  • Design the network “Blue book”
  • Install “White book”
  • Validate “Green book”
  • And in addition, there should be also one covering
  • Operate and Monitor

It is hard to give Service Availability Levels for wireless networks.

Here are some videos:

  • WSMS (Wireless Service Management System)
  • Need for Wireless Service & Security Standardization

11- Key parameter for design and planning requirement, Site Survey requirement, Planning guideline.

[Ronald]

Focusing on the Wi-Fi industry that is something that does not exist. There are books (like the Sybex version of the Certified Wireless Design Professional, but these are checklists of “what need to be done” and not “how it needs to be done”. The Wireless LAN Association (WLA) is in an initial progress looking into this (the 4x books, Requirement phase, Design phase, Implementation Phase and Validation Phase). Some vendors have a kind of wizard built-in and like iBwave parameters have been set already for different type of applications (like e-mail, voice, video traffic) and it can be customized as it depends also on the vertical market segment.

12- How should I consider APs that are on adjacent floors to provide Wi-Fi coverage and capacity? Or do I not consider those and design each floor independently?

[Ronald]

Correct. You typically design per floor level to have good RF coverage and Capacity for clients for different areas. If you have open spaces (like Atriums, you need to take that into account, maybe AP Transmit Radio Powers need to be reduced to avoid RF leakage through those Atriums, which means that suddenly clients see too many APs)

In the design tool (between the floors) you also need to see the attenuation levels (e.g. a very thick concrete floor or not), but if the APs can hear each other in 3D, then you also need to look at the Channel allocation that they do not interfere on the same channels (e.g. APs “stacked” on Channel 1).

13- I would like to know more about in-building design, Wi-Fi Design and DAS Design

[Ronald]

www.globeron.com/onlinetraining (Wi-Fi Training Certified Wireless Design Professional and also look into Certified Wireless Network Administrator as it covers RF, Spectrum, Protocols, Site Survey, Design, Analysis and Security)

BICSI 006-2015 Distributed Antenna System (DAS) Design and Implementation Best Practices https://www.bicsi.org/book_details.aspx?Book=BICSI-006-CM-15-v5

Go to the USA Conferences there are several presentations about DAS https://www.bicsi.org/single.aspx?l=1712

Winter Conference: https://www.bicsi.org/winter/2017/attendee.aspx?id=8734

14- How is Wi-Fi monitored i.e. capacity limits, interference, etc. just like other technologies?

[Ronald] 
There are several product vendors that have Wi-Fi Management systems where they get the information from the Wireless infrastructure components (like APs, Controllers, etc.). Some do only dedicated Wi-Fi Performance Management utilizing a centralized server and so called “Sensors” being deployed to monitor the Wi-Fi traffic and similar systems exist to monitor the Wi-Fi Security (Wireless Intrusion Detection / Prevention Systems) using Sensors. The advanced systems can do a combination and utilizing dual-band or tri-band APs were 1 or 2 radios provide Wi-Fi services (2.4 GHz and 5 GHz) and another radio provides Senso services

15- Is there anything on Wi-Fi SON (distributed or mesh) ?

[Ronald]

Self Organizing Networks (SON): https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2016/01/05/qualcomm-launches-wi-fi-son-self-organizing-network-solutions-simplify-wi

I do not have experience with this “SON” technology and how it operates. It looks proprietary to certain vendors. Other vendors also have kind of “self-healing” type of technology, like Radio Resource Management (RRM), Adaptive Radio Management (ARM), Smart RF, Channel Fly, looking and optimizing the RF aspects, but the other key features mentioned in SON are also supported by most vendors:

SON – Key features include:

  • Self-configuring that enables plug-and-play deployment (most vendors support adaptive AP adoption to controllers/cloud and management)
  • Self-managing that offers autonomous performance optimization
  • Self-healing actively detects and resolves connectivity bottlenecks (as mentioned above)
  • Self-defending that secures the network from unauthorized access (integrated WIPS systems).

16- Do you have High Density WLAN examples?

[Ronald]

Here are more details related to High Density WLAN

[Ronald]

High Density at Airports 
https://www.globeron.com/freedownload/services/Globeron-Wi-Fly-or-We-Cry-7-Aug-2016.pdf

Next week’s topic: Convergence,  Stay tuned! 

Cheytec Telecommunications Brings Better Indoor Coverage to the Enterprise using iBwave

Given our ever-growing need for data in today’s world of smart cities, smart buildings and the Internet of Things, the need for fast, reliable connectivity indoors has never been greater. Especially when it comes to the Enterprise.

Traditionally, wireless operators have been the main drivers for deploying indoor wireless networks to Enterprise venues and real estate properties. But with tenant and user demand out-pacing the carrier’s ability to -fund systems, building owners and Enterprise customers are now seeing the value of making capital investments in their properties and meet the demands of their network users.

Meet Cheytec Telecommunications, an iBwave customer whodelivers multi-operator turnkey in-buildng LTE solutions. Cheytec is helping to make an economic shift away from the carrier by expanding the addressable market to include building owners and enterprises. Cheytec does this by working with the wireless operators to bring their spectrum into buildings and leverage a highly developed partner network for both technology and service delivery. Capital investments in LTE coverage made by the building owner enables not just great indoor wireless service, but the opportunity for increased cash flows, higher valuations for property portfolios and new revenue sources. For wireless operators, the in-building system helps extend indoor coverage, densify networks,  offer new services to current customers and gain net-new subscribers.

How has iBwave helped?

Designing a multi-carrier indoor wireless networks certainly comes with its fair share of challenges, especially when you are designing for multiple technologies – Small Cells, DAS, and Neutral Host D-RAN(C-RAN), and multiple different venue types.

Previously, Cheytec typically used iBwave to design sports stadiums and transportation hubs – but now they are focusing more on the Enterprise verticals, and with that comes different challenges to overcome.  For example, the image on the right shows a heatmap generated in iBwave Design for a 4 story office building which Cheytec used to help select the right solution for this particular venue, accurately assess coverage and capacity requirements and estimate the cost of the entire system.

When using iBwave Design Enterprise, our multi-technology indoor wireless network planning and design platform, Cheytec’s engineers work more productively and can focus simultaneously on multiple projects. The result? Cheytec has reduced their network design process time by an estimated 30%.

Additionally, iBwave expedites the customer approval process significantly as customers recognize that they only use top quality tools and technologies within their designs – and that they have the ability to offer a wide range of in-building technology solutions with multiple design options. 

These benefits also lead to reduced time spent on project coordination internally. Because of the speed and flexibility of iBwave Design, it allows Cheytec to accomodate design changes without necessarily altering the project timeline.

“By using iBwave we shorten our response time in terms of delivering a proposal enabling our team to close more deals and generate more revenue.”

José Sangiuliano – Chief Technology Officer, Cheytec Telecommunications

Cheytec’s Favorite iBwave Features

When asked what their favorite features are in iBwave Design, here is what Cheytec said (and why):

Automation of Design Enterprise Networks

With the powerful and intelligent design automation that iBwave provides, design errors are reduced and the time to produce and change designs is accelerated – iBwave also provides them with an efficient way to provide alternative design options for comparative purposes.

3D Predictive Modeling

3D predictive modeling has also been very helpful to Cheytecby providing their customers with a powerful way to visually show the benefits of the proposed solutions and the network performance prediction results, similar to the image on the right showing the 3D model for 40+ story hotel DAS project.

Design and Simulation of Most Cost-Efficient Designs

Also, with the capability to design the entire network using the iBwave database of over 25,000 network components for all wireless technologies, Cheytec is always able to generate a full BOM with Cost Details. This means always being sure they are simulating the most cost-efficient designs, and that their customers have the best design possible for their specific building.

Cheytec’s mission is to deploy the right solution into the right building every time. Using iBwavehas helped them to achieve this consistently.

Conclusion

iBwave has been a key partner for Cheytec by providing a powerful, flexible and comprehensive software solution to provide Enterprise customers and property owners with turnkey LTE solutions that drive value. 


Thanks for being such a great customer Cheytec Telecommunications!

Are you an iBwave customer that wants to be featured in our Customer Spotlight series? Send us an email at marketing@ibwave.com

3 Features that Increase Prediction Accuracy

There are many things that can throw off the results of a network’s performance prediction during the design phase of a wireless network deployment.  Anything from setting the scale a little bit incorrectly, to using the wrong wall material type, to not knowing what is behind the venue’s walls that may impact signal loss, to using flat surfaces where there are incline surfaces – and the list goes on and on. Needless to say, accurately predicting the performance of a network before it goes live, can be hard to do because so many different factors impact it.

Which is why in iBwave software—both iBwave Wi-Fi and iBwave Design—we try to empower users with many capabilities to ensure that the prediction done in the design phase will be as accurately reflect the performance once it goes live, as accurately as possible.

Here are 3 ways to ensure more accurate prediction results using iBwave software.

The Materials Database and Editor

The out-of-box materials database in iBwave Wi-Fi and iBwave Design is extensive (give or take about 85 different defined materials). But we know that all the materials in the default database are the only ones that may be needed during the design of a network.  It is often the case that our customers need to add custom materials with differing signal loss configurations to ensure the most accurate representation of the venue they are modeling.  So for this reason, we’ve made adding new materials to the database easy for our customers to do themselves.  The materials database (and the components database) is fully editable for our customers to add their own materials and allows them enter information such as: transmission loss per band, conductivity per band, a material image (viewable in 3D) and then design properties such as trace color, texture width, height, etc.  

Here is an example of one of my favorite materials: Water at 20oC

Water Material Main Properties
Water Material: Signal Loss by Band (2.4GHz shown)

To read more about how to edit the components database, check out this blog

Prediction Calibration

Unique to iBwave when it comes to network design software is the ability to calibrate prediction results with a live reading from the venue. So for example, when designing a Wi-Fi network and you have done an active or passive survey on the site, you can then use the measurement readings to calibrate the prediction.  Because while you may have the right wall material selected in the model, you never know what is behind the wall that could impact the signal strength – metal beams, wood, etc. Using a live reading from the site to calibrate gets you that much closer to prediction accuracy. In iBwave Wi-Fi and iBwave Design there is also a ‘Prediction versus Measured Data’ report that can statistically show you the results of prediction versus the live measurement. 

Here is a screenshot of prediction calibration, as well as the ‘Prediction versus Measured Data Report’. In these two reports you will see that the mean error, absolute mean error, and the standard deviation prior to calibration are all significantly higher than after we ran calibration using the passive survey measurements. 

Defining the Calibration Model
Prediction Versus Measured Data Report (No Calibration)
Prediction Versus Measured Data Report (With Calibration)

Incline Surfaces

I covered this topic fairly thoroughly in a blog post a couple of weeks ago, but it’s an important factor when it comes to prediction accuracy so I am also including it here. The ability to accurately model incline surfaces for venues which have inclined surfaces (I’m thinking stadiums, shopping malls, airports, subway tunnels, etc) can be invaluable for ensuring the network prediction during the design phase is a realistic representation of how the network will perform post-installation.  In the one case study I did using a subway station/tunnel as an example, the difference between using incline surfaces during modeling and not can lead to a prediction difference of about 35dBm – which in reality translated to the users of the network having good signal strength, or none at all. 

Here are the screenshots from the subway station example. 

Flat Model with No Incline Surfaces (showing a good signal strength)
With Incline Surfaces (showing in reality how the network will perform poorly)

What are some other factors you have noticed have a large impact on accurate prediction results?

Wirelessly yours,

Kelly

Exit mobile version