Co-Existence of LTE Systems in 790-862mhz With DTT PDF

800MHz auction:
Co-existence of LTE
systems in 790-862 MHz
with Digital Terrestrial
Television
August 2011
DotEcon Ltd
Contents
Contents
1
Introduction
10
Structure of this document
13
Overview of approach and main assumptions
14
2.1
Approach taken
14
2.2
Main assumptions
15
2.3
DTT coverage and frequency plan
17
2.4
LTE network assumptions
27
Analysis of LTE networks operating at maximum power levels
30
3.1
Summary of results
30
3.2
Effect of interference on indoor coverage of DTT
35
3.3
Conclusions from the initial analysis
35
3.4
Observations on relevance of the initial analysis to real LTE deployments
37
Impact of interference assuming realistic LTE deployment assumptions
39
4.1
Determination of individual EIRP levels
39
4.2
Impact of realistic EIRP levels on potential for receiver overload
47
4.3
Composite overload effect from three networks
51
4.4
Impact of using realistic EIRP levels on the potential for ACI
52
4.5
Impact of realistic EIRP levels on ACI in DTT Channel 60 areas
61
4.6
Effect on indoor coverage
70
4.7
Effect of site sharing between the three networks
74
4.8
Near-field interference effects
74
4.9
Summary of results
75
Evaluation of possible mitigation measures
79
5.1
Use of DTT receiver filters
79
5.2
Mitigation via additional filtering on LTE base stations
82
5.3
Use of cross-polarisation between LTE and DTT
83
5.4
Improving the DTT signal level via on-channel repeaters
84
5.5
Mitigation via improving DTT receiver design
85
5.6
Platform change
87
5.7
Other forms of mitigation
88
Interference from LTE uplink emissions
89
Conclusions and recommendations
91
7.1
Summary of the main interference issues
91
7.2
Conclusions on the suitability of different mitigation techniques
92
1.1
2
800MHz auction: Co-existence of LTE systems in 790-862 MHz with Digital Terrestrial Television August 2011
ii
7.3
Introduction
Recommendations
94
Annex A Blocking results by geo-type within Danish broadcast regions (initial

analysis)
96
Annex B : DTT site characteristics for Channels 60, 59 and 58 in Denmark 98
Annex C : Maps showing areas of interference (initial analysis)
99
Annex D : LTE link budget
104
Annex E : Summary of modelling steps
106
800MHz auction: Co-existence of LTE systems in 790-862 MHz with Digital Terrestrial Television
August 2011
Contents
iii
Tables & Figures

Table 1
Channel plan for DTT multiplexes 1 to 6 [Source: NITA] .................. 20
Table 2
Regions in Denmark using upper DTT channels [Source: Analysys
Mason]........................................................................................................ 20
Table 3
DTT planning assumptions [Source: Analysys Mason] .................... 23
Table 4
DVB-T PRs in the presence of LTE interfering in a Gaussian channel
environment [Source: ECC] ........................................................................ 24
Table 5
LTE-DTT channel offsets in MHz used in the ACI analysis [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 24
Table 6
Correction factors applied to PR values [Source: Analysys Mason] . 25
Table 7
Interpolated PR values Gaussian channel [Source: Analysys
Mason]........................................................................................................ 25
Table 8
Interpolated ratios with correction factors Boxer DTT coverage
[Source: Analysys Mason] .......................................................................... 26
Table 9
Interpolated ratios with correction factors Digi-TV DTT coverage
Table 10 PR values plus correction factors, Boxer coverage fixed outdoor
reception [Source: Analysys Mason] ........................................................... 27
Table 11 PR values plus correction factors, Digi-TV coverage fixed outdoor
Table 12
Cell radii for LTE model [Source: Analysys Mason] ......................... 29
Table 13 Summarised results of blocking calculation from LTE to DTT, initial

analysis (59dBm EIRP, with 56dBm in Channel 60 areas) fixed outdoor
Table 14 Number of existing GSM900 sites of each
operator in the area of analysis [Source: Analysys Mason] ......................... 32
Table 15 ACI to Channel 60 in Vordingborg, portable indoor reception [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 35
Table 16 Calculated cell ranges for different EIRP levels [Source: Analysys
Mason]........................................................................................................ 41
Table 17 Theoretical site separation for different EIRP levels [Source: Analysys
Mason]27 ..................................................................................................... 41
Table 18 Number of base stations within the North Copenhagen sample area
Table 19 Number of sites per geo-type within the North Copenhagen sample
area [Source: Analysys Mason] .................................................................. 44
Table 20
Receiver overload per network [Source: Analysys Mason] .............. 47
Table 21 Receiver overload using realistic LTE EIRP levels scaled nationally
from the North Copenhagen sample area [Source: Analysys Mason] ......... 51
Table 22 Interference power sum of receiver overload from three networks for
sample area [Source: Analysys Mason] ...................................................... 52
800MHz auction: Co-existence of LTE systems in 790-862 MHz with Digital Terrestrial
Television - August 2011
iv
Contents
Table 23 ACI per network Network A in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:

Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 53
Table 24 ACI per network Network B in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 53
Table 25 ACI per network Network C in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 53
Table 26 ACI from LTE block FDD 1 to DTT Channel 59 using realistic LTE
EIRP levels, scaled nationally [Source: Analysys Mason] ........................... 58
Table 27 Number of sites per geo-type within the Ringsted-Sor sample area
Table 28 ACI per network Network A in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 66
Table 29 ACI per network Network B in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 66
Table 30 ACI per network Network C in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 66
EIRP levels, scaled nationally [Source: Analysys Mason] ........................... 70
Table 32
PR values plus correction factors, Channel 60 coverage, portable
indoor reception [Source: Analysys Mason] ................................................ 70
Table 33 ACI per network for indoor coverage Network A in blocks
FDD1/FDD2 [Source: Analysys Mason] ...................................................... 71
Table 34 ACI per network for indoor coverage Network B in blocks
Table 35 ACI per network for indoor coverage Network C in blocks
EIRP levels, scaled nationally, indoor coverage [Source: Analysys Mason] 73
Table 37 Site sharing in North Copenhagen sample area [Source: Analysys
Mason] ........................................................................................................ 74
Table 38 The effect of using realistic LTE EIRP levels and increased site
sharing on receiver overload [Source: Analysys Mason] ............................. 74
Table 39 Estimated reduction in the potential for blocking from use of DTT
receiver filters using realistic EIRP analysis for selected Channel 59 area
Table 40 Estimated reduction in the potential for ACI from use of DTT receiver
filters using realistic EIRP analysis for selected Channel 59 area [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 81
Table 41 Estimated reduction in the potential for ACI from use of DTT receiver
filters using realistic EIRP analysis for selected Ringsted-Sor area [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 82
Table 42 Impact of improving the blocking threshold modelled for one LTE
network interfering with DTT, operating at maximum licensed EIRP [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 87
Television August 2011
Contents
Table A.1
Site data for DTT Channels 60, 59 and 58 [Source: NITA] ........... 98
Table D.1
LTE link budget for downlink [Source: Analysys Mason] ........... 104
Table D.2
LTE link budget for uplink [Source: Analysys Mason] ................ 105
Figure 1
Band plan for 470870MHz in Europe [Source: Analysys Mason] ... 11
Figure 2
FDD channelling arrangement for 790862MHz [Source: ECC] ...... 11
Figure 3
DTT directional receiving antenna [Source: ITU-R BT.419] ............. 18
Figure 4
Danish broadcast regions [Source: NITA]........................................ 19
Figure 5
Regions using Channel 60 [Source: NITA] ....................................... 21
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Jaybeam antenna pattern [Source: Jaybeam, Analysys Mason] ...... 28
Figure 9 Areas of blocking from the three LTE networks [Source: Analysys
Mason]........................................................................................................ 32
Figure 10
Areas affected by ACI into DTT channel 60 from two LTE networks
Figure 11
Illustration of areas of coverage overlap in one LTE800 network
deployed on GSM900 sites [Source: Analysys Mason] ............................... 38
Figure 12
Selected area for analysis [Source: Analysys Mason] .................. 40
Figure 13
Approach to setting EIRP per base station site [Source: Analysys
Mason] 40
Figure 14
EIRP required for different site separations [Source: Analysys
Mason] 42
Figure 15
Site to geo-type matching Network A [Source: Analysys Mason]43
Figure 16
Site to geo-type matching Network B [Source: Analysys Mason]43
Figure 17
Site to geo-type matching Network C [Source: Analysys Mason]44
Figure 18
EIRP per site and coverage Network A [Source: Analysys Mason]

45
Figure 19
EIRP per site and coverage Network B [Source: Analysys Mason]

46
Figure 20
EIRP per site and coverage Network C [Source: Analysys Mason]

46
Figure 21
Areas affected by receiver overload Network A [Source: Analysys
Mason] 48
Figure 22
Areas affected by receiver overload Network B [Source: Analysys
Mason] 49
Figure 23
Areas affected by receiver overload Network C [Source: Analysys
Mason] 50
Figure 24
Areas affected by ACI Network A in FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 55
Television - August 2011
vi
Contents
Figure 25
Areas affected by ACI Network B in FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 56
Figure 26
Areas affected by ACI Network C in FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 57
Figure 27
Areas affected by ACI only, compared to ACI and blocking
Network A in FDD1/FDD2 [Source: Analysys Mason] ................................. 59
Figure 28
Network B in FDD1/FDD2 [Source: Analysys Mason] ................................. 60
Figure 29
Network C in FDD1/FDD2 [Source: Analysys Mason] ................................. 61
Figure 30
Selected Ringsted-Sor sample area for ACI Channel 60 analysis
[Source: NITA] ............................................................................................ 62
Figure 31
Geo-types assigned to existing GSM900 sites in Ringsted- Sor
Figure 32
EIRP per site and coverage Network A [Source: Analysys Mason]

64
Figure 33

64
Figure 34
EIRP per site and coverage Network C [Source: Analysys
Mason] 65
Figure 35
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 67
Figure 36
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 67
Figure 37
Analysys Mason]......................................................................................... 68
Figure 38
Density of households near Ringsted city area [Source: Analysys
Mason] 69
Figure 39
Areas affected by ACI (indoor reception) Network A in
Figure 40
Areas affected by ACI (indoor reception) Network B in
Figure 41
Areas affected by ACI (indoor reception) Network C in
Figure 42
Characteristics of UHF filter [Source: Braun Telecom] ................. 80
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
The National IT and Telecom Agency (NITA) is responsible for planning and
preparing an auction of 800MHz spectrum for the final decision by the Minister of
Science, Innovation and Technology (the Minister). In this regard, NITA has
engaged DotEcon and Analysys Mason as advisers. Particularly, we have been
tasked with: analysing the scope for use of this spectrum; assessing the risk of
interference from the use of this band to digital terrestrial television (DTT)
services; considering whether, and how, any coverage obligations may be
imposed on the licences in pursuit of the governments overall broadband goal;
and designing a suitable auction.
This report presents the results of theoretical modelling and analysis that
DotEcon and Analysys Mason have conducted for NITA considering the potential
interference to DTT from future mobile use of the 790862MHz band (the
800MHz band) in Denmark.
The results of our analysis suggest that between 9 000 and 10 000 households
nationally might be at risk of some kind of interference from mobile use of the 800
MHz band.
Two modes of interference have been considered; receiver overload and
adjacent channel interference (ACI).
More detailed results of our analysis suggest that:
Between 2 500 and 3 000 households nationally might be at risk of

interference from receiver overload
Between 4 500 and 5 000 households might be at risk of interference from
ACI in areas of Denmark receiving DTT services using Channel 60, and
up to 2 000 households in areas using Channel 59
Our analysis was conducted in two parts. The purpose of the first high-level
analysis was to establish whether interference from LTE to DTT could potentially
be a problem. This first part of the analysis considered the potential interference
mechanisms into DTT that might occur from one or several long-term evolution
(LTE) network(s) operating at assumed maximum licensed power levels, and the
extent of interference created.
The results of this initial analysis suggested that there is considerable scope for
interference from LTE to DTT if it is assumed that all LTE base stations operate
at their maximum licensed power level.
Having established from our initial analysis that there could be an interference
problem from LTE to DTT, we then conducted more detailed analysis to model
the effects of a series of realistic LTE network deployments. This further analysis
took into account that in practice, only a proportion of LTE base stations will
transmit at the maximum licensed power level, and the majority will use lower
power levels for various practical reasons (e.g. due to planning restrictions, other
site restrictions or management of internal interference).
We found that the number of DTT households affected by receiver overload from
three LTE networks across Denmark was reduced to around 2 500 - 3 000 DTT
households. The effect of ACI is also substantially reduced for areas of the
country using DTT Channel 59, with an estimate of around 2 000 DTT
households in total being affected.
Executive Summary
We found that around 4 500 5 000 DTT households might be affected by ACI in
areas of the country using DTT channel 60, as a result of interference from one
LTE network.
The third and final part of the analysis was to assess the feasibility of further
reducing the impact of interference predicted from LTE to DTT, through the
consideration of various possible interference mitigation techniques.
Considering the range of possible mitigation methods that can be used to reduce
the impact of LTE interference to DTT and/or to restore the DTT service, we
found that the use of filters at DTT receivers appears to be the most cost effective
and practical mitigation technique. Our modelling suggests that use of filtering
will substantially eliminate interference from both overload and ACI, leaving a
small number of households for which filtering is not suitable. These are most
likely to be households viewing DTT services using Channel 60 and receiving
interference from LTE block FDD1.
Other suitable forms of mitigation, which can be applied on a case-by-case basis,
include filtering of LTE base stations (which can be used in conjunction with DTT
receive filters to further reduce the number of households affected), crosspolarisation between LTE and DTT antennas (i.e. using the opposite of DTT
polarisation at LTE sites), and installation of DTT on-channel repeaters. The latter
might be particularly considered in areas where television viewing households
are located at the edge of DTT coverage.
A possible further means of mitigation against DTT receiver overload and ACI
would be to improve the immunity of DTT receivers, by designing them with a
higher interference threshold (called overload threshold, or Oth) and protection
ratio (called PR). A higher Oth and PR limit could be specified within receiver
standards for DTT services, to ensure that future receivers are designed with a
higher threshold and protection ratio in mind. Recent measurements conducted
by the European Communications Committee (ECC) suggest that some DTT
receivers on the market today already exhibit a better Oth and PR than assumed
within the modelling for this report. It is noted that Denmark would not be able to
make this change to DTT standards itself. It is possible that a change to
standards could be market driven; if regulatory action is required, this would
potentially require EU-wide cooperation, since standards for DTT are panEuropean.
In conclusion, we have found that, whilst our initial analysis suggested that
interference from LTE to DTT is a problem, in practice assuming that mobile
operators will optimise the power and characteristics of individual base stations
within their network (and not use maximum licensed power limits at all sites), the
interference problem is substantially reduced. Application of the further
mitigation methods discussed above could almost eliminate any issues, leaving
only a very small number of affected DTT households possibly of the order of a
few hundred in total across Denmark. For the remaining few households that
continue to suffer receiver overload or ACI after all appropriate mitigation
methods have been considered, the only option would to use an alternative
television (TV) platform such as cable, satellite or IPTV.
Given that operators are likely to apply reduced power levels in many areas of
their network, we do not think it is necessary for NITA to consider any specific
licence conditions within the 800 MHz licences other than a maximum EIRP limit.
However, it is possible that additional requirements could be considered in
relation to managing interference from the lowermost LTE blocks (FDD1/FDD2)
Executive Summary
to DTT services in areas of Denmark using Channel 60, which our analysis has
suggested could be particularly problematic in terms of potential for ACI. It might
be necessary to consider a reduced EIRP limit for base stations using blocks
FDD1 and FDD2 although it is noted that this limit should be considered carefully
in view of its impact upon the ability of mobile operators to provide LTE coverage,
particularly in suburban and rural areas.
10
Introduction
1 Introduction
The migration from analogue to digital terrestrial TV (DTT) transmission is now
well underway in most European countries, and was completed in Denmark on 1
November 2009. In Denmark, all terrestrial TV services are now being delivered
digitally using DVB-T technology. These digital services, like the superseded
analogue services, use UHF spectrum for their transmission. The UHF spectrum
used for broadcasting was originally 470862MHz, but the ITU World Radio
Conference in 2007 (WRC-07) decided to allocate the upper part of this
spectrum, from 790862MHz, for mobile services on a co-primary basis with
broadcasting.
Following WRC-07, the European Commission (EC) recommended that Member
States make the sub-band from 790862MHz (the 800MHz band) available for
electronic communications services, via a decision published in 2010 (EC
Decision 2010/267/EC). The EC also requested the European Communications
Committee (ECC) to consider harmonised technical conditions, including a
frequency plan. The Danish government has decided to award licences in the
800MHz band in line with the European harmonisation efforts: the underlying
band plan will follow the European plan.
The harmonised European plan for the 800MHz band (as described in ECC
Decision (09)03) divides the spectrum into two 30MHz blocks for FDD1 downlink
and uplink respectively.2 There is an 11MHz duplex gap, which is intended for
use by PMSE3 in Denmark.
According to the European Common Allocation Table (ERC Report 25), the band
above 862MHz is designated for use by various short-range devices (SRDs),
including RFID.4
There is a 1MHz guard band between 790 and 791MHz, which divides the top of
the DTT spectrum and the first long-term evolution (LTE) channel.
The European band plan for 470870MHz is summarised in Figure 1 below.
Frequency Division Duplexing
2
2
The conclusion of CEPT Report 31 was that the preferred frequency arrangement for the
The
conclusion
of CEPT
Report
was
that the FDD
preferred
arrangement
for the
800MHz
band was
an FDD
plan.31
The
230MHz
plan frequency
with an 11MHz
duplex gap
was
800MHz band was an FDD plan. The 230MHz FDD plan with an 11MHz duplex gap was
subsequently defined in ECC Decision (09)03.
Programme-Making and Special Events
Radio-frequency Identification: applications that exchange data between a reader and an

electronic tag attached to an object, for the purpose of identification and tracking.
Introduction
Figure 1
Mason]
11
Band plan for 470870MHz in Europe [Source: Analysys
Assuming that the 800MHz band is divided into 5 MHz channels, this suggests
six FDD channels can be accommodated within the band as illustrated in Figure
2 below (it is noted that the ECC also considered other frequency
arrangements, including unpaired spectrum for time division duplexing (TDD)
systems, but the recommended channelization is using paired channels).
DTT channels
LTE FDD downlink

790 MHz
58
59
60
FDD1
8 MHz
1 MHz
Figure 2
821 MHz
791 MHz
FDD2
FDD3
FDD4
FDD5
5 MHz
FDD6
11 MHz
FDD channelling arrangement for 790862MHz [Source: ECC]
Throughout our report we therefore refer to FDD1, FDD2, FDD3, etc., as being
consecutive FDD downlink channels of 5MHz bandwidth, starting from the
791MHz band edge, in line with the channel plan illustrated above.
As a result of various compatibility studies conducted within the European
Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT), the band
plan shown above for mobile use of the 800MHz band employs a duplex direction
that is reversed when compared to the normal European convention. Normally,
mobile bands are planned with the uplink (base station receive/mobile transmit) in
the lower band and the downlink (base station transmit/mobile receive) in the
upper band. However, due to concerns regarding interference from future mobile
transmission to DTT below 790MHz, it was decided for the 800MHz band to
reverse the duplex direction, so that the downlink is in the lower band.
For the purposes of the interference analysis presented in this document, we
have assumed that:
future mobile use of the 790862MHz band will be based on LTE

technology
LTE will use a 5MHz carrier width, which results in six channels (blocks)
being available.5
In the remainder of this report we refer to these six blocks as FDD1 FDD6.
12
Introduction
Although a 1MHz guard band has been incorporated into the European plan, it
was recognised during the compatibility studies conducted by CEPT that such a
1MHz guard band might not be sufficient to resolve potential interference from
LTE base stations to DTT reception below 790MHz. Two modes of interference
are possible:
Adjacent channel interference (ACI) interference caused by a

transmitter operating in an adjacent channel.
Receiver overload (blocking) occurs when a strong in-block LTE signal
overloads the DTT receiver front-end, making it unable to detect the DTT
transmission (regardless of the level the DTT signal is at).
Overload is primarily dependent on the absolute level of the LTE signal within the
DTT operating band, and has only limited dependency on frequency. 6 ACI is
frequency-dependent, however, and is dependent on the ratio between the DTT
and the LTE signal levels. The channels closest to 790MHz (DTT Channels 60,
59 and 58) are therefore likely to be the channels that are most susceptible to
ACI.
The ECs 800MHz Decision defines certain baseline technical requirements for
use by electronic communications networks deployed within the 800MHz band,
which are aimed at reducing the potential for interference, while recognising that
they will not resolve all cases of interference and that further restrictions might be
required. The conditions specified in the EC Decision are defined using block
edge masks (BEMs) based on technical work conducted within the CEPT.7 The
BEMs consist of in-block and out-of-block components, which specify the
permitted emission levels for frequencies within, and outside of, the 800MHz
block respectively (with particular regard to protection of adjacent DTT services
below 790MHz).
The in-block limits incorporated into EC Decision 2010/267/EC provide flexibility
for national regulators to determine an in-block EIRP limit if required. The
Decision suggests that, unless otherwise justified, limits would normally lie within
the range 56dBm to 64dBm (in a 5MHz bandwidth).
For the purposes of this study, NITA has asked us to initially assume a maximum
licensed EIRP value of 59dBm in each of the LTE channels, except for two areas
(Sjlland and Lolland-Falster) where DTT Channel 60 is used: in these areas a
maximum value of 56dBm is assumed for LTE Channels FDD1 and FDD2 only.
In our initial analysis, we assume that all base stations transmit at these
maximum limits. In our subsequent analysis, we apply different EIRP levels at
individual base stations, in line with more realistic mobile deployments.
The DTT-to-LTE interference analysis that is being conducted as part of this
study therefore uses these assumptions as inputs to evaluate the potential for
interference from LTE to DTT caused by overload and ACI, and the various ways
that this impact can be reduced. All of the analysis described in this report has
6
This is illustrated by Table 5b of ECC Report 148, which lists overload threshold (Oth) values
for different frequency offsets.
CEPT Report 30: Identification of common and minimal (least restrictive) technical conditions
for 790862MHz for the digital dividend in the European Union.
Introduction
13
been conducted using a radio planning tool to predict (area) coverage of

interference caused by overload and ACI, and how this reduces when different
mitigation techniques are applied either individually or collectively.
1.1 Structure of this document

The remainder of this document is structured as follows.
Section 2: Describes the approach and main assumptions used throughout the
analysis.
Section 3: Assesses the impact of interference from one or several LTE
network(s) operating at maximum power levels, summarising the main
interference issues identified, and the various deployment scenarios and
operational environments within which different issues are most likely to occur.
Section 4: Describes the results of our modelling of the impact of interference
from multiple LTE networks operating at power levels consistent with actual
power levels we believe might be used by mobile operators in practice, rather
than all transmitting at the maximum licensed power level. In this analysis, we
have selected a sample area to the north of Copenhagen, and evaluated the
potential for receiver overload (blocking) and ACI to occur from LTE networks
designed using base station locations based upon existing GSM900 networks,
but with power levels at individual base stations individually determined based
upon the location of the base station with respect to its nearest neighbour. In
order to assess the potential for ACI to DTT Channel 60, we have also selected a
further sample area Ringsted-Sor which uses this channel.
Section 5: Describes our assessment of possible mitigation approaches this
describes the different approaches that could be used, and the deployment
scenarios and operational environments in which they might apply. It also
presents the analysis we have conducted into the suitability of different possible
mitigation techniques, in terms of reducing the impact of predicted effects of
overload and ACI from LTE to DTT.
Section 6: Describes potential interference effects from LTE uplinks (i.e. mobile
devices) to DTT.
Section 7: Presents our conclusions and recommendations, including the
conclusions on the use of practical EIRP limits below the maximum licensed limit,
and the suitability of different interference mitigation techniques, along with
various recommendations for NITA to consider in relation to finalising policy with
regards to the conditions for award of 800MHz licences.
14

2.1 Approach taken
The overall approach to modelling interference that we have adopted throughout
our analysis uses a radio planning tool to predict coverage and interference. The
tool used is the ATDI ICS Telecom radio planning tool (version 9.8.0). This has
been used alongside a Microsoft Excel model and MapInfo software, to estimate
coverage loss from interference and the associated impact in terms of the
numbers of Danish households affected.
We have used the following data sets within our analysis:
Danish household data from The National Survey and Cadastre of

Denmark (KMS)
digital terrain (height) data from Denmark with 50-metre resolution
clutter data with 50-metre resolution
site and frequency data for existing DTT sites from the ITU-R Geneva 06
(GE-06) agreement8 as modified through associated bilateral agreements
for Denmark, provided by NITA the DTT channel plan taken into
consideration in this study is therefore the modified version of the original
GE-06 plan, taking account of DTT re-planning out of the 800 MHz subband
base station mast data for current 2G and 3G mobile deployments in
Denmark, as provided by NITA (March 2011 version)
measured overload threshold (Oth) and protection ratio (PR) values from
the ECC Report 148, with selected values consistent with protecting 90%
of receivers
DTT wanted field strength maps produced in CRC-Predict and IRT2D,
provided by the Danish terrestrial broadcasters (Boxer and Digi-TV).
The analysis conducted using the radio planning tool is based upon the potential
for interference due to receiver overload or ACI from LTE base stations. The
results from this analysis are presented in Sections 3 and 4.
We have also undertaken a literature review of a number of published reports, as
agreed with NITA, which consider the potential for interference from the LTE
uplink (i.e. mobile devices) to DTT receivers. It is noted that the ECC band plan
provides a 42MHz frequency separation between the upper edge of DTT
Channel 60 and the first uplink channel, which is expected to mitigate the majority
of interference problems from the uplink channel. The documents we have
reviewed, which are further described in Section 6 of this report, are as follows:
CEPT Report 30 identification of common (and least restrictive)

technical conditions for 790862MHz for the digital dividend in the
European Union
ITU-R: Final Acts of the Regional Radiocommunications Conference for planning of the digital
terrestrial broadcasting service in parts of Regions 1 and 3, in the frequency bands 174230MHz and 470862MHz (RRC-06).
2.2
15
material presented by the European Broadcast Union at various

workshops9
A study conducted in the UK by the government-sponsored Digital
Communications Knowledge Transfer Network10
A contribution from the UK to ECC Task Group 4, on UK measurements
of LTE into DVB-T conducted by Cobham Technical Services.11
Main assumptions
Our analysis makes various assumptions in relation to DTT and LTE deployment
in Denmark, in the absence of any interference mitigation being applied. A
summary of the main assumptions is as follows.
9
10
11
12
DVT-T transmission in Denmark uses two system variants: the

multiplexes operated by Digi-TV use a 64-QAM 2/3 code rate, while the
multiplexes operated by Boxer use a 64-QAM 3/4 code rate. This leads to
differences in DTT planning levels for the two networks, and impacts
receiver protection ratios (the minimum carrier-to-interference ratio
necessary to avoid performance degradation to DTT viewing as a result of
LTE interference, at a given frequency offset). In particular, for our
analysis, the different code rates give rise to a 2dB difference in the
required protection ratio for Boxers multiplexes compared to Digi-TV,
which we have incorporated into our analysis.
We have assumed from our household dataset that there are a total of 2
359 106 households in Denmark. The number of households receiving
DTT on one or more television set is assumed to be 20% of total
households in Denmark (i.e. the remaining 80% receive television using
alternative platforms). The source of this assumption is Gallup statistics
(for end 2010). Results throughout this report for households that could
potentially be affected by interference are presented as affected DTT
households, which is 20% of total households in Denmark
The DTT coverage criteria are assumed to be 95% of locations, with a

lognormal field strength standard deviation of 5.5dB.12
We have also assumed that interfering LTE signals are subject to

lognormal fading with a standard deviation of 5.5dB, which has been
http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/events/ecs10/presentations/ebu_ecs10_workshop_sami.pdf
http://docbox.etsi.org/Etsi_Cenelec/PUBLIC%20FOLDER%20on%
20DD/UK%20DKTN%20DD/DCKTN%20Digital%20Dividend%20
Technologies%20Spectrum%2011Jun10%20v11%20(SR).pdf
th
ECC TG4(10)317, UK measurements of LTE into DTT, presented to the 15 meeting of ECC
TG4.
Location probability is the probability that within a given (small) area a field strength level is
exceeded at a required percentage of points see ITU-R JTG 5/6 Methodology for sharing
studies between the mobile and terrestrial broadcasting service in the band 790862 MHz,
Section 3.1.1.1.
16
reflected in the link budgets used for the overload and ACI thresholds
within our planning tool.
We have modelled the actual antenna polarisation and patterns for DTT,
which are taken from the GE-06 agreement and plan data for Denmark,
as modified by NITA to account for cross-border coordination agreements.
We have assumed fixed outdoor (rooftop) reception for DTT throughout

the majority of our analysis, but have compared the effects of reception to
portable coverage within a selected area of Denmark, as described in
Section 3.
We have assumed that LTE antennas will use slant polarisation (i.e.
employing two sets of antennas slanted at 45 degrees to the horizontal
plane), providing 3dB discrimination against horizontal/vertical polarised
DTT signals. However, we have also separately considered the impact of
using vertically polarised antennas for LTE as a means of comparison
with the use of slant antennas, and as a possible means of improving
interference mitigation.
For field strength predictions, a height and clutter database with 50 metre
resolution has been used. This is not always sufficient to detect very small
coverage gaps, which is noted as a limitation of our analysis.
For our initial analysis using maximum licensed EIRP limits, we first
calculated theoretical LTE cell radii necessary to provide a downlink data
rate of 8Mbit/s using a link budget (for details see Annex D). We then
used these theoretical cell radii values to develop a theoretical LTE
network providing coverage across Denmark, based upon using the base
station locations of an existing GSM network in Denmark as the basis of
the network, but adding additional cell sites where required to achieve the
calculated cell radii for LTE. We then assumed that all sites would
transmit at their maximum licensed power level of 59dBm EIRP (or
56dBm EIRP in areas where DTT Channel 60 is used), irrespective of the
actual power level required at the site from the link budget.
For our subsequent analysis using individually determined EIRP levels

per base station, we used the same link budget to develop a theoretical
relationship between the required EIRP of a site and the separation
between the site and its nearest neighbour (assuming sites are located in
line with the existing GSM900 networks currently operating in Denmark).
We then applied these individual EIRP levels within the base stations of
three networks, modelled on different GSM900 networks in Denmark,
referred to as Network A, Network B and Network C. Each of the three
networks modelled therefore exhibits different site densities and EIRP per
site.
Protection ratios for DTT interfered with by mobile services are based
upon interpolated values obtained from ECC Report 148.
17
2.3 DTT coverage and frequency plan

2.3.1 DTT coverage
Frequencies for DTT services have been planned within Europe and across ITU
Region 1 via the GE-06 agreement and plan. The Final Acts of GE-06 contain
DTT planning parameters assumed within the agreement, along with the detailed
methodology for coordination of DTT networks between neighbouring countries.
GE-06 describes three reception modes for DTT:
fixed reception where a rooftop-mounted directional receiving antenna is

used
portable reception where a portable receiver with an attached or built-in
antenna is used, either outdoors or indoors
mobile reception where reception is via a receiver in motion.
The different reception modes affect the height and gain of the receiver assumed
when calculating the field strength for acceptable reception. For fixed reception, a
10 metre height (above ground level) is assumed, whereas for portable and
mobile, a 1.5 metre height is assumed.
Standard radiation patterns for fixed receiving antennas are provided in
Recommendation ITU-R BT.419.13 For portable and mobile reception it is usually
assumed that an omnidirectional antenna is used.
Within our analysis, we have assumed DTT fixed reception throughout the
majority of our analysis, with antenna characteristics according to ITU-R BT.419,
as illustrated below.
13
Recommendation ITU-R BT.419-3: Directivity and polarisation discrimination of antennas in

the reception of television broadcasting.
18
Figure 3
DTT directional receiving antenna [Source: ITU-R BT.419]
In the current Danish DTT coverage plan, coverage is defined to exist when 95%
of locations within a 50x50 metre pixel receive field strength above a specified
threshold. The minimum field strength is taken to be 47dBV/m for the 64-QAM,
2/3 coded mode of DTT in channel 60, in line with the GE-06 agreement. In
accordance with the JTG 5/6 methodology, in order that an area can be
considered as covered, the wanted field strength must exceed the minimum field
strength at 95% of the locations within the area. An uplift of 9dB is therefore
added to the minimum value, to correspond to the reception of an un-interfered
DTT signal at 95% of locations, giving a minimum median field strength in the
pixel of 56dBV/m for 2/3 coded transmission, and 58dBV/m for 3/4 coded.14
Danish DTT networks are planned on the basis of 15 broadcast regions, and we
have used these regions within our analysis to enable calculation of households
covered with, and without, interference, per region. The 15 regions are illustrated
in Figure 4 below.
14
Section 5.3.2.2 of the JTG methodology
Figure 4
19
Danish broadcast regions [Source: NITA]
2.3.2 Frequency plan

In line with many other European countries, the DTT deployment in Denmark
uses a multi-frequency network, which means that many households do not use
the upper DTT channels (i.e. 58, 59 and 60), which are particularly susceptible to
ACI. It is noted that receiver blocking can occur irrespective of frequency offset,
and so all households in Denmark could theoretically be affected by that.
The frequency plan for DTT in Denmark is based on five multiplexes, with a sixth
reserved for mobile television (using DVB-H technology). DTT services are
provided by two broadcast companies Digi-TV (DR and TV2) and Boxer. The
frequency plan for multiplexes 16 is summarised below.
20
Area name
MUX 1
MUX 2
MUX 3
MUX 4
MUX 5
MUX 6
Tolne-Nibe
29
57
50
37
35
39
Thisted
31
42
22
43
21
49
Videbaek
40
59
52
48
34
28
Viborg
40
59
52
56
21
45
Hadsten + Aarhus
26
44
24
56
55
36
Hedensted
30
44
33
46
55
36
Varde
30
54
33
46
53
28
Aabenraa
37
50
32
22
49
41
Tommerup + Svendborg
25
43
27
22
49
41
Vordingborg + Nakskov
58
34
42
38
60
48
Jyderup
58
51
42
31
60
23
Kbenhavn
53
51
54
31
59
23
59
56
51
39
31
32
Table 1
Channel plan for DTT multiplexes 1 to 6 [Source: NITA]
From the table above it can be identified that the following regions in Denmark
use the upper DTT channels, which are the most susceptible to ACI.
DTT channel
Regions affected
60 (782-790MHz)
Vordingborg + Nakskov, Jyderup
59 (774-782MHz
Kbenhavn, R, Videbk, Viborg
58 (766-774MHz)
Vordingborg + Nakskov, Jyderup
Table 2 Regions in Denmark using upper DTT channels [Source:

Analysys Mason]
The regions in Denmark that uses the upper DTT channels are shown in Figure 5
to Figure 7 below.
Legend
CH60 coverage region
Other regions
Figure 5 Regions using Channel 60 [Source: NITA]
Legend
Other regions
21
22
Legend
Other regions

Digi-TV operates services using Channels 58 and 59 in Vordingborg + Nakskov,
Jyderup and R. Boxer operates services using Channels 59 and 60 in
Kbenhavn, Vordingborg + Nakskov, and Jyderup. Since the Digi-TV and Boxer
networks use different DTT configurations (3/4 coding and 2/3 coding
respectively), we have modified our analysis of ACI for the affected channels to
reflect the difference in planning and protection parameters (minimum received
signal strength and PR) resulting from the different coding rates. Also, since the
coverage areas of Channels 58 and 60 overlap, we have not conducted specific
analysis within the study on Channel 58 areas.
23
2.3.3 Characteristics of DTT transmitters and receivers

A summary of other parameters used in our analysis is provided below.
Value
Assumption and source
Modulation and coding
64-QAM, 2/3 coding (MUX 1 and 2) and 3/4 coding (MUX

3, 4 and 5) (Source: NITA)
DTT channel bandwidth
8MHz (Source: ITU-R GE-06)
Minimum field strength for fixed

outdoor reception (DTT Channel 60)
47dBV/m (Source: ITU-R Recommendation1368-8)
Location probability
95% (leading to an operating field strength of 56dBV/m,

including 9dB uplift to account for 95% location probability
as indicated by ITU-R15)
Receiving antenna gain
12dBd (Source: ITU-R GE-06), with antenna pattern as

illustrated in Figure 3.
Receiver feeder loss
5dB (Source: ITU-R GE-06)
Directivity discrimination
3dB (between slant polarised LTE antennas and

horizontal/vertical DTT source JTG5/6 methodology for
sharing studies between the mobile service and DTT,
section 4.2.2.4)
Wanted and unwanted signal

standard deviation
5.5dB giving a combined location correction factor of

12.8dB
Building penetration loss
8dB with a 5.5dB standard deviation
Table 3
DTT planning assumptions [Source: Analysys Mason]
2.3.4 DTT protection ratios and overload threshold

Two of the key parameters used within our analysis are the protection ratio (PR)
between the DTT and the LTE signal, and the DTT overload threshold. We
discuss each of these below.
DTT PR values fixed outdoor reception
Protection ratio refers to the ratio (in dB) of the power of the wanted signal to the
total power of interfering signals, usually expressed at the receiver input. PRs for
a DTT signal interfered with by another DTT signal are well understood, and are
specified in various ITU-R recommendations, and also in the GE-06 Final Acts.
For the purposes of this analysis, however, PRs for a DTT signal interfered with
by an LTE signal are required. This has been the subject of recent study within
the CEPT and the ITU-R, and studies within the CEPT have led to ECC Report
148 being published in 2010, detailing measurements on the performance of
15
For example, in ITU-R JTG 5/6: Methodology for sharing studies between the mobile service,
on the one hand, and the terrestrial broadcasting service, on the other hand, in the band 790
862MHz.
24
DVB-T receivers in the presence of interference from the mobile service. The
report provides the combined results of measurements conducted in a number of
European countries, for a range of DTT receiver types and models. Table 5.1 of
Report 148 provides the following PR values for a 64-QAM, 2/3 coded DTT
signal16, for the stated frequency offsets.
Channel edge separation
DVB-T protection ratio (dB)
-33
-40
17
-44
25
-48
33
-49
41
-50
49
-50
57
-51
65
-45
Table 4 DVB-T PRs in the presence of LTE interfering

in a Gaussian channel environment [Source: ECC]
The PRs quoted above are presented for a 64-QAM, 2/3 coded signal at the
stated channel edge separation (e.g. from the edge of the 790862MHz band in
8MHz offsets). In order to obtain PRs suitable for our analysis, we have
interpolated the values above to reflect the frequency offsets of interest to this
study, which are detailed below. We have also applied a number of correction
factors, as detailed in the ECC report and other sources, as shown in the
following tables.
LTE/DTT
DTT 58
DTT 59
DTT 60
FDD1
17
FDD2
22
14
FDD3
27
19
11
FDD4
32
24
16
FDD5
37
29
21
FDD6
42
34
26
channel
Table 5 LTE-DTT channel offsets in MHz used in the ACI analysis

[Source: Analysys Mason]
16
90 percentile values are quoted in Figure 3.4, and for silicon tuners, although ECC Report 148
also presents results for 10 and 50%, with the percentage referring to receivers measured, i.e.
the 90 percentile values should be used to protect 90% of receivers measured, and also for
can and silicon USB tuners.
Factor
Value/source
Correction for fixed reception conditions

(Ricean channel) relative to Gaussian channel
(for 2/3 coding)
1.1 dB
Correction for fixed reception conditions

(Ricean channel) relative to Gaussian channel
(for 3/4 coding)
2.8 dB
Location correction factor
12.8dB
Table 6
25
Correction factors applied to PR values [Source: Analysys Mason]
Interpolation of the PR values given in Table 4 above provides the PRs calculated for
LTE Channels FDD1, 2 and 3, with respect to DTT Channels 58, 59 and 60, as follows.
DTT/LTE channel
FDD1
FDD2
FDD3
60
-33
-37
-41
59
-40
-43
-45
58
-44
-47
-48
Table 7
Mason]
Interpolated PR values Gaussian channel [Source: Analysys
Within our planning tool, we have then applied the various correction factors described
in Table 6 to the PR values above, to account for alternative DTT coding, reception
conditions and locations margin. This gives the following input values to our planning
tool (see Table 8 and Table 9 below), using the PR values above in combination with
the various correction factors. There are two different sets of inputs to reflect analysis
for the Digi-TV and Boxer DTT coverage areas, respectively.
26
Frequency offset
Interpolated PR from
Plus location
Plus 2.8 dB correction for 3/4
ECC Report 148
correction factor
coding and fixed reception (Ricean

channel)
-33
-20
-17
-37
-25
-21
-40
-27
-24
11
-41
-28
-25
14
-43
-30
-27
16
-44
-31
-28
17
-44
-31
-28
19
-45
-32
-29
21
-46
-33
-30
24
-48
-35
-31
25
-48
-35
-32
27
-48
-35
-32
29
-49
-36
-33
Table 8
Interpolated ratios with correction factors Boxer DTT coverage
Frequency
Interpolated PR from
Plus location correction
Plus 1.1 dB correction for
offset
ECC Report 148
factor
fixed reception (Ricean

channel)
-33
-20
-19
-37
-24
-23
-40
-27
-26
11
-41
-28
-27
14
-43
-30
-29
16
-44
-31
-30
17
-44
-31
-30
19
-45
-32
-31
21
-46
-33
-32
24
-48
-34
-33
25
-48
-35
-34
27
-48
-35
-34
29
-49
-36
-35
Table 9
Interpolated ratios with correction factors Digi-TV DTT coverage
This gives the following PR inputs to our planning tool for the various frequency
offsets of interest to the study (incorporating correction factors).
27
DTT/LTE channel
FDD1
FDD2
FDD3
60
-17
-21
-25
59
-24
-27
-29
58
-28
-30
-32
Table 10
PR values plus correction factors, Boxer coverage fixed
outdoor reception [Source: Analysys Mason]
DTT/LTE channel
FDD1
FDD2
FDD3
60
-19
-23
-27
59
-26
-29
-31
58
-30
-33
-34
Table 11
PR values plus correction factors, Digi-TV coverage fixed
This means that, in our planning tool, the median field strength predicted from
LTE FDD1 must be a maximum of 17dB above the median wanted (DTT) signal
in Channel 60 for the Boxer coverage, to avoid interference.
DTT overload threshold
Receiver blocking or overload refers to the effect of a strong out-of-band
interfering signal on the receivers ability to detect a low-level wanted signal. The
DTT overload threshold (Oth) is defined in ECC Report 148 as the interfering
signal level expressed in dBm, above which the receiver begins to lose its ability
to discriminate against interfering signals at frequencies differing from that of the
wanted signal, i.e. the onset of non-linear behaviour.
ECC Report 148 describes the measured Oth for various DTT receivers,
suggesting that overload typically occurs at a level of LTE interference of
between -15dBm and -5dBm.17 For our analysis, we have selected a value at the
lower end of this scale, and we have used an overload threshold of -15dBm
throughout our modelling. This therefore represents a conservative assumption,
and it should be noted that most TV receivers and set top boxes will perform
better than this18. Our analysis can therefore be considered to represent a worst
case in terms of possible TV receiver performance.
2.4 LTE network assumptions

To simulate an LTE network in our analysis, we have needed to make
assumptions on the number and location of base stations within a typical LTE
network.
17
18
This is the typical range the full range of measurements described in ECC Report 148 range
from 03dBm to -26dBm.
According to ECC Report 148 the -15dBm value corresponds to the value at which the 10%
worst performing receivers overload.
28
The following parameters have been assumed:
LTE base stations transmit in the 791-821 MHz band
Channel bandwidth is 5 MHz
Location probability is 75% at the cell edge
Receiver height is 1.5 metres
Base station maximum licensed in-band EIRP is 59 dBm/5MHz (reduced

to 56dBm/5 MHz for the lower most LTE BS channel on islands of
Sjaelland and Lolland-Falster, where DTT Channel 60 is used)
Base station antenna gain is 15dBi
Tri-sectored cells are assumed
Propagation model used for predicting LTE coverage is ITU-R P.1812
It is noted that mobile networks can deploy a hierarchy of macro, micro and picocells, with micro and pico cell base stations typically operating at reduced power
and height. We have not incorporated micro and pico-cells into our analysis but
have instead focussed on macro cells.
Throughout our analysis we have assumed an antenna height of 30 metres being
applicable to macro-cell base stations, and have assumed a Jaybeam B800A085
antenna, as illustrated in Figure 8 below.
Figure 8
Mason]
Jaybeam antenna pattern [Source: Jaybeam, Analysys
To calculate the theoretical cell radii of LTE base stations within a typical
network, we have used a link budget (see 0). The link budget has been derived to
achieve an 8Mbit/s downlink service in different outdoor coverage environments
(urban, suburban and rural). We have assumed a 75% cell edge probability when
deriving the cell radii for LTE, which is consistent with typical assumptions made
29
by the cellular industry when developing link budgets.19 The resulting cell radii
calculated from the link budget and used in our model are listed below.
Geo-type
Cell radius (km)
Urban
2.1
Suburban
3.6
Rural
5.8
Table 12
Cell radii for LTE model [Source: Analysys Mason]
These cell radii have been calculated as being representative of cell radii needed
to achieve an LTE 800MHz coverage layer. In practice, it is assumed that
operators will also deploy LTE at 1800MHz, 2100MHz and/or 2600MHz to meet
capacity requirements. Therefore, the above cell radii do not take into account
the level of traffic to be delivered within a network, but are designed primarily to
achieve coverage.
In our initial analysis using maximum licensed EIRP levels, we have modelled an
LTE network using base station locations based upon an existing GSM900
network in Denmark, but have added additional sites, where required, to provide
a network of the required dimensions to achieve the cell radius above, consistent
with requirements for a network achieving around 98% population coverage at a
downlink data speed of 8 Mbit/s. In this initial analysis, the actual power level
required at each base station site relative to neighbouring sites has not been
accounted for.
In our subsequent analysis, we modified our approach to individually vary the
EIRP of base stations as necessary, relative to neighbouring sites. In this case,
we have again used the existing base station locations of GSM900 networks in
Denmark as the basis of LTE site locations, but have modified the EIRP per site
based upon its geo-type (urban, suburban or rural) and distance with respect to
its nearest neighbouring site. This subsequent analysis has focussed on one
area of Denmark in particular, to the north of Copenhagen; this area uses DTT
Channel 59.
19
For example, see WCDMA for UMTS: HSPA Evolution and LTE, Holma and Toskala, 2010
30
Analysis of LTE networks operating at maximum power

levels
The first part of the analysis considered the potential interference mechanisms
into DTT that might occur from LTE networks operating at maximum licensed
power levels, and the extent of interference potentially created under that
assumption. The purpose of this first high-level analysis was to establish the
extent to which interference from LTE to DTT could be a problem, and to assess
the main characteristics of both LTE and DTT networks that influence the extent
of interference.
In practice we expect that the majority of LTE base stations, particularly those in
urban areas, will use a lower power level than the maximum allowed limit, for
various practical reasons. In the section, we consider the impact of this in more
detail, by predicting interference effects caused by receiver overload and ACI
under the assumption that individual power levels at LTE base stations might be
varied depending on the location of the base station and its proximity to
neighbouring sites. In this section, interference is modelled assuming that all
base stations transmit at their maximum licenced transmit power (EIRP) level.
3.1 Summary of results

Our initial modelling using maximum licensed EIRP levels per base station site
has considered two interference mechanisms from LTE to DTT, namely blocking
and ACI. Overall, our analysis suggests that the dominant interference issue
affecting DTT households in this case could be blocking, rather than ACI.
A summary of our results is provided below.
3.1.1 DTT receiver overload
Our initial modelling suggests that around 54 000 of DTT households could be
affected by receiver overload in Denmark from a single LTE network, assuming
an LTE base station EIRP of 59dBm in most areas (and 56dBm in Channel 60
areas). The network modelled consisted of a total of 1445 macro base stations,
distributed between urban, suburban and rural areas. The number of households
predicted to be affected by receiver overload corresponds to around 2.3% of the
total households in Denmark, and 3.4% of the total country area could be
affected.
Our results suggest receiver overload could potentially affect a proportion of
households in almost all urban areas of Denmark. This is due to the higher
density of base stations in urban compared to suburban or rural areas and the
fact that in areas where there are mixed geo-types, the highest number of
affected households are in urban areas. For example, within the Kbenhavn
broadcast region, 72% of affected households are in geo-types we have defined
in our model as urban20.
20
The geotypes in our initial analysis are defined based on municipal areas in Denmark and
population density.
31
A full breakdown of results is presented in Table 13 below. A map showing the

areas of interference is included in Annex C.
Broadcast region
Total area
2
(km )
Total
households in
Affected area
2
Affected DTT
(km )
households
area
Anholt
21
588
1.1
Laeso
117
3526
37
Tolne-Nibe
6140
266 939
166
5 777
Viborg
2599
85 044
68
1 348
Thisted
1529
44 170
28
977
Videbaek
5094
150 321
106
2 573
Hadsten + Aarhus
4507
279 245
195
7 490
Hedensted
3060
163 648
102
3 462
Varde
2684
99 804
70
1 930
Aabenraa
3810
124 076
96
1 911
Tommerup + Svendborg
3473
231 985
148
4 797
Kbenhavn
2844
551 716
233
16 549
Vordingborg + Nakskov
3339
151699
180
3 178
585
27 820
32
892
2956
178 525
99
3 125
Re
Jyderup
Table 13
Summarised results of blocking calculation from LTE to DTT,
initial analysis (59dBm EIRP, with 56dBm in Channel 60 areas) fixed
We have repeated this analysis for one area of Denmark assuming three LTE
networks operate in the same area, to illustrate the increase in blocking
compared to a single network. We have chosen to model three networks since it
is likely that there will be three 800MHz licence winners in Denmark, as has been
the case in other European countries where 800MHz frequencies have been
auctioned. The area selected is to the north of Copenhagen; it was chosen
because it contains predominately urban areas. The number of base station sites
within each of the three networks within the area of our analysis is shown below.
As before, we assume that each base station operates at its maximum licensed
EIRP of 59dBm (or 56dBm where Channel 60 is used).
We have assumed that three LTE networks operate within the selected area,
which we refer to in our analysis as Networks A, B and C. Base station locations
within each network are based upon existing 900MHz base station locations in
Denmark21.
21
We have manually modified coverage in some areas to reflect a target coverage of 98%
population within the area.
32
Operator
Number of sites
Network A
74
Network B
128
Network C
129
Table 14
Number of existing GSM900 sites of each
operator in the area of analysis [Source: Analysys Mason]
In terms of the impact of three networks operating in the same area, we have
found that the number of households potentially affected by receiver overload
could increase from around 5 900 for one network, to 16 000 DTT households if
three networks are operating in the same area. This equates to just over half
(52%) of all households within the area at risk of blocking from at least one of the
LTE networks.
It can be seen that many of the areas affected by blocking from the three
separate networks overlap, as shown in Figure 9 below.
Figure 9
Areas of blocking from the three LTE networks [Source:
Analysys Mason]
Of the households affected, we have found that the majority (88%) of these in the
area considered are located in urban areas. This is in line with expectations that
the risk of blocking is likely to be higher in areas where there is a high
concentration of LTE sites, which normally occurs in highly populated areas.
The results demonstrate the following.
Having three LTE networks within the area increases blocking by almost
three (2.8) times the amount caused by a single network. Given our initial
result that one network operating at maximum licensed power levels could
33
cause receiver overload to around 54 000 households nationally, this

could scale to around 150 000 DTT households if three national networks
operating at maximum licensed power levels were deployed in the
800MHz band.
The majority of blocking is predicted to occur in areas where there is a
high concentration of LTE base stations typically in urban areas. This
suggests the highest risk of blocking to DTT services will be in urban
areas, which concurs with the results for a single LTE network.
The high incidence of receiver overload is due to the assumption that all
base stations will transmit at their maximum licensed EIRP level, whereas
in practice it is likely that operators will choose to use lower EIRP at some
base stations depending on the environment (urban, suburban or rural)
and density of base stations deployed. Our subsequent analysis,
described in the section 4, therefore explores this effect in more detail.
3.1.2 Adjacent Channel Interference (ACI)

Our initial analysis suggests that ACI is predicted to affect less households than
receiver overload (when assuming that LTE network operate at maximum licensed
power levels). Households affected are limited to those located in areas where DTT
services using Channels 60, 59 and 58 are operating. We found that around 5 600
DTT households in Channel 60 areas could potentially experience interference from
LTE services using the closest channel (FDD1). This number reduces to around 4
800 DTT households affected by ACI from FDD2, and around 1 400 DTT
households from FDD3. FDD2 and FDD3 produce less interference because of the
increased frequency separation between FDD2 and FDD3 and the DTT channel(s),
compared to FDD1.
We also found that around 4 800 households might be affected by ACI from the
closest channel (FDD1) within channel 59 areas.
Areas of interference from ACI from one LTE network using Channel FDD1 are
illustrated in Annex C.
We have also considered the cumulative effect of ACI from multiple LTE
networks using different channels within the 800MHz band, to DTT areas using
Channels 60, 59 and 58. This shows that the lowermost LTE block (FDD1)
contributes the most significant cumulative ACI into adjacent DTT channels.
Blocks FDD2 and FDD3 interfere with a sub-set of households affected by ACI
from FDD1. Channel 60, which is only used by Boxer in Denmark, is most
affected by ACI.
Whereas our analysis suggests that around 5 600 DTT households could be
affected by ACI from a single LTE network within Channel 60 areas, the analysis
also suggests that the cumulative number of households affected by ACI from
two LTE networks (one using Channels FDD1 and FDD2, and the second using
34
Channels FDD3 and FDD4) could be up to 7 800 DTT households. We estimate

that around 1 000 of these might receive interference from both networks22.
This is illustrated in Figure 3.2, where the blue areas represent ACI caused by
the network using FDD1/FDD2 and the yellow areas represent ACI caused by the
network using FDD3/FDD4.
Figure 10
Areas affected by ACI into DTT channel 60 from two LTE
networks [Source: Analysys Mason]
It is noted that a large proportion of households suffering ACI will also suffer from
receiver overload, since the areas affected by ACI overlap with the areas affected
by receiver overload, as described above. Our analysis suggests that, of the 5
600 DTT households in Channel 60 areas who are affected by ACI from LTE
block FDD1, around 3 800 might also suffer receiver overload.
Overload is also potentially the more severe of the two modes of interference
because, in the presence of receiver overload, reception of all DTT services is
lost, whereas with ACI the interference affects reception of services using
particular DTT MUXs (in particular, those broadcast using Channel 60 and
Channel 59).
22
The sum of the households affected by ACI from FDD1/FDD2 and FDD3/FDD4 is 42 905,
compared to the cumulative number of households of 37 947, equating to a difference of
4958.
35
3.2 Effect of interference on indoor coverage of DTT

To illustrate the effect of LTE interference on indoor DTT reception23, we have
repeated our ACI analysis for the Vordingborg area only. For this, we have
applied the height-gain correction factor of 18dB, as provided in ITU-R GE-06.
We have also assumed an omnidirectional antenna with a gain of 0dBi. For
portable reception indoors, a building penetration loss is also required we have
used a value of 8dB, with a standard deviation of 5.5dB. No feeder loss has been
included.
Within the Vordingborg area, DTT coverage is provided using Channel 60. The
total area is around 1000km2, and the total number of households in the area is
45 600.
The results of our analysis into the effects of ACI on indoor reception are
summarised below (these number represent the potential maximum total
households in the area rather than the proportion of households receiving
television using DTT).
LTE channel
Number of DTT
Percentage of
households
households
affected
affected
FDD1
253
FDD2
FDD3
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
2.8%
0.6%
120
1.3%
0.3%
55
0.6%
0.1%
Table 15
ACI to Channel 60 in Vordingborg, portable indoor reception
Our initial analysis suggests that, for fixed rooftop reception 4.0% of households
using Channel 60 are potentially interfered from LTE Channel FDD1 within the
Vordingborg sample area, with the affected area being 0.9% of the total area
modelled. For portable indoor reception the potentially interfered households
reduces to 2.8% of DTT households, with the affected area being 0.6%. This
difference is potentially due to the lower height of the receiving antenna for portable
receivers compared to fixed reception, and the fact that penetration of signals within
buildings provides some mitigation from interference.
3.3 Conclusions from the initial analysis

Our initial analysis, assuming that each base station within an LTE network
transmits at its maximum licensed power, concludes that
Blocking could affect 11.5% of DTT viewing households, equating to a

total of around 54 000 DTT households, based on an assumed LTE EIRP
of 59dBm (or 56dBm in Channel 60 areas). This mainly affects
23
i.e. where DTT services are not received via a fixed outdoor antenna but use a portable antenna
located inside the building
36

households in urban areas for example, within the Kbenhavn
broadcast region, 72% of affected households are in geotypes we have
defined as urban.24
24
The effect of having three LTE networks operating within the area
increases blocking by almost three (2.8) times the amount caused by a
single network. This could scale to around 150 000 DTT households
nationally, if three national networks operating at maximum licensed
power levels were deployed in the 800MHz band.
ACI from a single LTE network using Channel FDD1 could affect up to
around 5 600 DTT households in Channel 60 viewing areas. For two LTE
networks (one using Channels FDD1 and FDD2, and the second using
FDD3 and FDD4) the cumulative number of households affected by ACI
within Channel 60 areas rises to 7 600 DTT households. Some 1 000 DTT
households could receive interference from both networks.
We have also considered the impact of ACI on indoor reception in the

Vordingborg city area, for households covered using Channel 60. Our
analysis suggests that 4% of households using fixed rooftop reception
could experience ACI from LTE Channel FDD1. The affected area is 0.9%
of the total area modelled. For portable indoor reception, the proportion of
affected households reduces to 2.8% (affected area 0.6% of the total).
This may be due to the lower height of the receiving antenna for portable
receivers compared to fixed reception, and the fact that penetration of
signals within buildings provides mitigation from interference.
Blocking is predicted to be the more significant of the two interference

modes using our initial assumptions on LTE base station EIRP. ACI has a
more localised effect, occurring only in areas where Channel 60 and
Channel 59 are used, and where the DTT field strength is also low.
Typically, DTT field strength is low where households are located at the
edge of DTT coverage and so receive a weak TV signal compared to
households with a better signal path to the DTT transmitter.
A large proportion of households suffering ACI will also suffer blocking,

since the areas affected by ACI overlap with those affected by blocking.
Of the 5 600 DTT households in Channel 60 areas who are affected by
ACI from LTE block FDD1, around 3 800 might also be subject to receiver
overload. Overload is potentially the more severe of the two modes of
interference because it leads to the loss of reception of all DTT services,
whereas with ACI affects reception of services using particular DTT MUXs
(in particular, those using Channels 60 and 59).
The potential for blocking to occur is not frequency dependent 25 (i.e. it

could occur from any FDD block to any DTT channel, regardless of
The geotypes are defined based on municipal areas in Denmark and population density.
37
frequency), and is sensitive to the distance between the LTE base station
and the household, primarily as a result of the design of DTT receivers
and their overload threshold.
3.4 Observations on relevance of the initial analysis to real LTE

deployments
Of particular relevance to the initial analysis is the assumption that a uniform
EIRP, equivalent to the maximum licensed EIRP level, is deployed across the
entire LTE network: that is, all sites transmit at the same power and with a similar
height of antenna with the exception of base stations in Channel 60 areas,
where we have assumed a slightly lower EIRP.
As described earlier in this section, our assumption has been that LTE800 will be
deployed by mobile operators using existing 900 MHz sites where practical. It is
noted that the density of 900 MHz sites deployed in some areas of Denmark will
lead to significant overlapping coverage between neighbouring sites if all sites
are assumed to transmit at the maximum licensed power level of 59 dBm.
As an illustration of this, the figure below illustrates the substantial coverage
overlap that could occur if it is assumed that LTE800 is deployed on all GSM900
sites within a 2G network in Denmark with an EIRP of 59 dBm at all sites.
25
Although blocking is generally not frequency dependent, measurements of overload threshold (Oth) of
different DTT receivers presented in ECC Report 148 indicate some dependency between the measured
Oth and the frequency offset between the LTE and the DTT signal. Specifically, measurements suggest
a variation in the Oth when the TV receiver is tuned to a channel at a frequency offset of 33MHz or less
(which corresponds to the offset between LTE block FDD1 and DTT channels 56-60), compared to the
Oth when the receiver is tuned to a lower channel (i.e. 21 to 55).
38
Areas covered by
more than 1 site
All sites with EiRP of 59dBm
Figure 11
Illustration of areas of coverage overlap in one LTE800
network deployed on GSM900 sites [Source: Analysys Mason]
In practice, we expect that operators will deploy base stations with a lower EIRP
than 59 dBm in different parts of their network. This will be done in order to avoid
significant coverage overlap between to sites (which would lead to increased
interference within the network) as well as to comply with specific planning
restrictions in some areas, which can affect the installation of base stations (e.g.
due to height or antenna size restrictions), leading to lower EIRP levels being
radiated. In particular, site availability and planning differences between urban,
suburban and rural areas will mean that EIRP levels will vary in different parts of
the network, with significantly lower EIRP levels typically being used in urban
areas compared to the most rural sites, for example.
Since the assumption in our initial analysis that all LTE sites will transmit at
maximum licensed levels is unlikely to reflect how LTE networks will be deployed
in practice, the next section of this report considers the impact of assuming more
realistic EIRP levels being used within an LTE network, and how this affects
interference to DTT.
We have conducted this subsequent analysis focussed on two sample areas of
Denmark (one to the north of Copenhagen and one in the Ringsted-Sor area),
where we have varied the EIRP per individual base station site in line with a more
practical network deployment.
Our approach and results to this analysis are described in the section 4.
39
Impact of interference assuming realistic LTE

deployment assumptions
Our first high-level analysis as described in the previous section assumed a
uniform EIRP level is used across all sites in an LTE network, and also assumed
that the maximum licensed EIRP level would be used at all sites. In practice,
since mobile operators will use different EIRPs levels at different sites to manage
interference within their networks, and in response to site planning restrictions in
some areas, the initial analysis does not reflect how a real LTE network might be
deployed in practice
This section therefore describes further analysis to consider the effects of more
realistic assumptions being taken on LTE base station transmitted power levels.
The effect of altering EIRP at selected sites is discussed in more detail in this
section, and the corresponding impact on the potential for receiver overload and
ACI to DTT assessed.
4.1 Determination of individual EIRP levels

Mobile operators use a number of techniques to optimise the field strength
transmitted from individual base stations, including varying the output power from
the base station, use of antenna down-tilt, use of sectored antennas and, for
LTE, use of MIMO (Multiple In, Multiple Out) antennas. Also, in WCDMA and in
LTE networks, power control is used to optimise the power of individual links
between the network and a device. The combination of these factors leads to
variation in the transmitted power from individual base stations within a network,
depending on the base station location, its distance from the nearest
neighbouring site, and the characteristics of the traffic load.
For this analysis, we firstly selected a sample to the north of Copenhagen, which
we have divided into urban, suburban and rural geo-types based upon the clutter
data used within our planning tool, as illustrated below26.
26
The morphology (clutter) data set for our planning tool includes urban, suburban and rural areas,
shown as red, yellow and white in the diagram, as well as forest, shown as green. For our analysis
we have incorporated forest areas into our rural geo-type. Our morphology data set also includes
water and sea categories, which we did not use in our analysis.
40
Figure 12
Selected area for analysis [Source: Analysys Mason]
Figure 13 below illustrates the methodology we have used to determine the EIRP
at individual base station sites within several LTE networks operating in the same
area.
Calculate cell
range for different
EIRP
Assign sites in
LTE networks to
geo-types
Derive required
site separation
from cell range
Assign EIRP per

site based on
site separation
Verify EIRP-site
separation curves
using planning tool
Re-run overload
and ACI effects
Modify EIRP curves

based on planning
tool
Produce final
coverage plot per
network
Figure 13
Approach to setting EIRP per base station site [Source:
Analysys Mason]
We first calculated theoretical cell ranges for a range of EIRP levels between 30
and 60dBm using the link budget listed in Annex D, which assumes an OkumuraHata propagation model. This gave the following theoretical cell ranges for
different geo-types, for a range of EIRP levels from 30 to 60dBm (see Table 16).
EIRP
Cell range urban
Cell range suburban
Cell range rural
(dBm)
(km)
(km)
(km)
30
0.40
0.69
2.28
35
0.55
0.95
3.16
40
0.76
1.32
4.38
45
1.06
1.83
6.07
50
1.46
2.53
8.42
55
1.55
2.69
8.94
60
1.55
2.69
8.94
41
Table 16
Calculated cell ranges for different EIRP levels [Source:
Analysys Mason]27
We then calculated the theoretical site separation required between base stations
for the given EIRP range (assuming some overlap in coverage for handover, as is
usual in practice), as shown in Table 17Error! Reference source not found..
EIRP
Theoretical site
Theoretical site
Theoretical site
(dBm)
separation urban
separation suburban
separation rural
(km)
(km)
(km)
30
0.69
1.20
3.95
35
0.95
1.65
5.48
40
1.32
2.29
7.57
45
1.84
3.17
10.52
50
2.53
4.38
14.59
55
2.69
4.66
15.49
60
2.69
4.66
15.49
Table 17
Theoretical site separation for different EIRP levels [Source:
Analysys Mason]27
Verifying the theoretical distances using the planning tool, we found the rural
EIRP levels to be lower than required for the range of separation distances of
interest to our analysis. We therefore adjusted the rural curve by adding 10dB to
the EIRP, giving the following relationship between site separation and EIRP for
urban, suburban and rural geo-types (see Figure 14).
27
The link budget becomes uplink-limited at around 51dBm, and so cell ranges do not change
above this level.
42
Site separation (km)
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
BS EIRP (dBm)
Urban
Figure 14
Mason]
Suburban
Rural
EIRP required for different site separations [Source: Analysys
Using the existing GSM900 site locations within Denmark, we identified the
number of base stations within the North Copenhagen sample area for our
analysis, for each of the three existing GSM900 networks. This provided the
following base station numbers for three networks within the sample area (Table
18).
Network ID
Number of base stations
Network A
55
Network B
129
Network C
128
Table 18
Number of base stations within the North Copenhagen
sample area [Source: Analysys Mason]
For each of the three networks based upon the existing GSM900 networks, we
mapped the location of the base stations within the sample area, and assigned a
geo-type to each site. This is illustrated in the maps below. In each of the
following maps, red represents urban areas, yellow sub-urban and white rural.
(Note that green and blue areas represent forest, water and sea. We have
combined the forest areas into the rural geo-type (white). Water and sea areas
are not used.)
43
Figure 15 Site to geo-type matching Network A [Source: Analysys Mason]
Figure 16
Site to geo-type matching Network B [Source: Analysys Mason]
44
Figure 17
Site to geo-type matching Network C [Source: Analysys Mason]
This resulted in the following number of sites per network for each geo-type:
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Network A
14
26
14
Network B
26
73
29
Network C
33
76
20
Table 19
Number of sites per geo-type within the North Copenhagen
Finally, based on the site locations within each of the three networks, we
calculated the distance from each base station to its nearest neighbour. Using the
EIRP-to-site-separation curve illustrated above (Figure 14), we then assigned a
unique EIRP to each site, based upon the required EIRP for the calculated site
separation.
We then modelled a series of coverage predictions for each network in our
planning tool to validate coverage. Coverage was predicted using propagation
model ITU-R P.1812, with receiver height at 1.5 metres, and predictions based
upon predicting coverage for 50% locations and 50% time within the cell (noting
that theoretical cell ranges assume a 75% cell edge probability (i.e. the
probability that a mobile device will receive a signal above the specified threshold
value, at the edge of a cell).
We also modelled best server and simultaneous site display predictions to
highlight the areas of overlap between sites, which resulted in some manual
45
adjustment of the assigned EIRP level per site in a number of locations where
overlapping areas were calculated to be too large with the assumed EIRP.
The final composite coverage results from each network, along with the assigned
EIRPs per site, as predicted in our planning tool, are illustrated in the maps
below. It is noted that the resulting population coverage from the three networks
is 82% of the population within the North Copenhagen sample area for Network
A, and 96% for Network B and Network C. The coverage figures are different for
each network because the number and location of the base stations differ. This is
in line with expected LTE deployment, since it is noted that different numbers of
base stations are employed within existing 900 MHz networks in Denmark.
It is also noted that the percentage coverage is useful in our analysis only to
compare the interference effects of the three networks. It is expected that
coverage in practice will be better than predicted by our analysis, since in
practice the GSM900 networks that we have used as the basis of determining
base station locations have base stations just outside the selected North
Copenhagen sample area, which have been excluded from our coverage
calculation.
Figure 18
Mason]
EIRP per site and coverage Network A [Source: Analysys
46
Figure 19
Figure 20
EIRP per site and coverage Network C [Source: Analysys Mason]
47
It is noted that the assumed planning level for the LTE service is 53 dBV/m (for
a 10 Mbit/s downlink service with 75% probability of reception at the cell edge),
and so the diagrams above illustrate different receive signal strength indicators
(RSSI) with respect to that planning level: the blue colour represents areas where
the planning level is achieved, white areas are those with an RSSI lower than the
planning level, and aqua/green areas are where the RSSI is higher than the
planning level. Since the LTE link budget used for our analysis calculates cell
ranges for an 8Mbit/s LTE (downlink) outdoor service, the blue areas in the
diagrams above can be considered to be areas where an 8Mbit/s service
(outdoors) will be received. Areas where the 8Mbit/s service will potentially be
exceeded are shown as aqua/green.
4.2 Impact of realistic EIRP levels on potential for receiver overload

Once we determined the EIRP level per base station site and the coverage per
LTE network, we then followed the same modelling approach as described in
Section 3 to estimate the potential impact of interference into DTT from the three
LTE networks caused by receiver overload and by ACI.
It should be noted that DTT provider Boxer operates using Channel 59 in
Copenhagen and so our analysis of interference within this area uses the DTT
coverage maps provided by Boxer as the basis of determining DTT field strength.
PR values for the ACI analysis also assume a 64-QAM, 3/4 coded signal (as per
Boxers network).The following results summarise the number and percentage of
households and area affected by receiver overload for each of the three networks
within our North Copenhagen sample area.
For reference, the total number of households within the North Copenhagen
sample area is 154 534 (total DTT households is therefore 30 906) and the total
area is 586.52 km2.
DTT households
affected
Percentage of
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
affected
Network A
111
0.4%
0.2%
Network B
51
0.2%
0.5
0.1%
Network C
48
0.2%
0.5
0.1%
Table 20
Receiver overload per network [Source: Analysys Mason]
Maps of the areas affected by blocking from each network are provided below.
48
LTE Site
Figure 21
Areas affected by receiver overload Network A [Source:
Analysys Mason]
Figure 22
Areas affected by receiver overload Network B [Source:
Analysys Mason]
49
50
Figure 23
Areas affected by receiver overload Network C [Source:
Analysys Mason]
It can be seen from these maps that there is some overlap between the areas in
which households are subject to receiver overload from each of the three
networks i.e. some households may be subject to receiver overload from
signals of multiple base stations. Our estimate is that, of the total of around 210
households that could be subject to receiver overload, up to 25% of these (i.e.
around 50) are in areas receiving overload from more than one network. The
total receiving overload from the three networks might be up to around 170.
However, this does not take into account the power sum of interference from
different LTE base station sources, which could increase this number slightly, and
is described in the following section (4.3).
These results highlight the significant reduction in the number of households
affected by receiver overload assuming that base stations within LTE networks
do not radiate at their maximum licensed limit. Extrapolating the results from our
North Copenhagen sample area to a national level28 shows that between 700
28
We have extrapolated the results from the North Copenhagen sample area to the national area
of Denmark by weighting the number of households affected by geo-type within the area, scaled
across the country.
51
and 1600 DTT households could suffer receiver overload per LTE network (see
Table 21 below).
As noted in the previous section, the three LTE networks modelled contain
different numbers of base stations, and use different base station locations. Our
analysis assumes that as the number of base stations deployed within a network
increases the EIRP that is necessary per site reduces.
The location of households affected by receiver overload varies between the
three networks. For Networks A and C, just over half of the households affected
by receiver overload are in suburban geo-types. For Network B, the majority of
households affected are in rural geo-types. This suggests a different distribution
of affected households compared to our initial analysis using a uniform EIPP level
at all sites, which predicted the majority of households affected were in urban
areas.
Our results therefore suggest that as the average EIRP within networks reduces,
the potential for blocking to DTT also reduces (i.e. this reflects the fact that
typically in urban areas, lower EIRP is used per site). Compared to our initial
results assuming maximum licensed EIRP at all sites, the results below indicate a
98% reduction in the potential for receiver overload.
DTT households
affected
Percentage of
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
affected
Network A
1 600
0.3%
60
0.1%
Network B
833
0.2%
48
0.1%
Network C
689
0.1%
35
0.1%
Table 21
Receiver overload using realistic LTE EIRP levels scaled
nationally from the North Copenhagen sample area [Source: Analysys
Mason]
The total households affected by overload, calculated by summing the effects of
the three networks, is therefore around 3 100 DTT viewing households. This
represents a reduction in receiver overload of around 98% compared to our initial
estimate calculated assuming three national networks using maximum licensed
EIRP levels at each base station site.
4.3 Composite overload effect from three networks

As noted above, our modelling predicts that some areas will receive LTE signals
at levels sufficient to cause DTT receiver overload from more than one LTE
network. To confirm this effect, we re-ran the analysis described in the previous
section using an interference power sum prediction method in the planning tool,
in order to more accurately estimate the cumulative effect of having several LTE
52
networks operating in the same area, compared to the sum of individual

networks29.
The maps presented earlier (Figure 4.17 to Figure 4.19) illustrate that some
areas are affected by receiver overload from base stations in more than one LTE
network. The earlier analysis suggested that around 210 households in total
could suffer receiver overload within the North Copenhagen sample area.
However, since there is some overlap between areas, the actual households
affected (without an interference power sum calculation) is around 162 in total.
Comparing this with a calculation using an interference power sum, we found that
the number of households is very similar, around 164. The difference in the
results is summarised below (Table 22).
DTT households
affected
Percentage of
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
affected
Non-composite
162
0.5%
0.3%
Composite effect
164
0.5%
0.3%
Table 22
Interference power sum of receiver overload from three
networks for sample area [Source: Analysys Mason]
Scaling this result nationally, according to the results per geo-type in the North
Copenhagen sample area aggregated by geo-type nationally, suggests that
between 2 500 and 3 000 of the households in Denmark that receive television
via DTT could be subject to receiver overload from the combined effects of three
LTE networks operating in the 800MHz band.
4.4 Impact of using realistic EIRP levels on the potential for ACI
Assessing the impact of LTE on ACI in the North Copenhagen sample area if the
LTE networks are using realistic EIRP levels, we also found a significant
reduction in the ACI effects, compared to a situation where all sites use their
maximum licensed EIRP level. The results of the ACI analysis are shown in the
tables below. In the ACI case, since effects are frequency-dependent, we have
repeated the analysis to investigate the effect of a different network (A, B or C)
using the lowermost LTE channel (FDD1), which our initial analysis showed to
cause the most ACI.
For each calculation we assumed a network would use a 2x10 MHz bandwidth
within the 800MHz band hence in the first set of results below (Table 23),
Network A is assumed to use blocks FDD1 and FDD2, Network B uses blocks
FDD3 and FDD4, and Network C uses blocks FDD5 and FDD6.
29
The power sum calculation takes account of the aggregated effect of LTE signals arriving from
different sources at the receiver.
DTT households
affected
Percentage of
households
Area affected
2
53
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
affected
Network A
(FDD1/FDD2)
485
1.6%
0.6%
Network B
65
0.2%
0.1%
49
0.2%
0.5
0.1%
(FDD3/FDD4)
Network C
(FDD5/FDD6)
Table 23
ACI per network Network A in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]
DTT households
Percentage of
affected
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
affected
Network B
290
0.9%
0.6%
100
0.3%
0.2%
95
0.3%
0.1%
(FDD1/FDD2
Network C
(FDD3/FDD4)
Network A
(FDD5/FDD6)
Table 24
ACI per network Network B in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]
DTT households
Percentage of
Area affected
Percentage of
affected
households
(km2)
area affected
affected
Network C
314
1%
0.5%
240
0.8%
0.3%
46
0.1%
0.1%
(FDD1/FDD2
Network A
(FDD3/FDD4)
Network B
(FDD5/FDD6)
Table 25
ACI per network Network C in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]
The areas affected in each case are illustrated in the maps below. We have also
illustrated the location of DTT sites within the North Copenhagen sample area. In
the maps, blue areas show ACI caused by Network A, green by Network B and
yellow by Network C.
Comparing the maps below with our geo-types for the sample area suggests that
ACI only affects suburban and rural areas; none of the urban areas within our
sample were affected by ACI. This is assumed to be due to two factors; firstly
more DTT households in suburban and rural areas being located further from
54
DTT transmitters, and so at the edge of DTT coverage (noting that ACI depends
on the ratio between DTT and the LTE signal levels), and secondly, the density of
LTE base station sites, which means sites will transmit at lower powers in
general.
Figure 24
Analysys Mason]
55
56
Figure 25
Analysys Mason]
57
Figure 26
Analysys Mason]
Extrapolating the ACI results from our North Copenhagen sample area to a
national level provides the results shown below, suggesting that up to 2 000 DTT
households could be affected by ACI from a network using LTE blocks
FDD1/FDD230.
30
We have scaled the results from the sample area to the national area of Denmark using DTT
channel 59 by geo-type.
58
DTT households
affected
Percentage of
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
total area
affected
Network A
1935
1.5%
35
0.5%
Network B
1164
0.9%
43
0.9%
Network C
1270
1%
36
0.5%
Table 26
ACI from LTE block FDD 1 to DTT Channel 59 using realistic
LTE EIRP levels, scaled nationally [Source: Analysys Mason]
It is noted that the North Copenhagen sample area for our analysis is not an area
that uses Channel 60 and so the national ACI results in this case relate to the
number of households receiving ACI within areas of the country viewing services
via DTT Channel 59 and not via DTT Channel 6031. Noting this, Section 0 of this
report provides further analysis within another sample area of the country using
DTT Channel 60 using the same approach to setting realistic EIRP levels as
described previously.
From our initial analysis described in Section 3 (using maximum licensed EIRP at
all sites) we found that around 4 800 DTT households would be affected by ACI
in areas using Channel 59, and so the revised results described in this section
using realistic EIRP levels suggests a 60% reduction in affected households.
As with our initial analysis, it should be noted that a proportion of households
suffering ACI will also experience receiver blocking, which is the more severe of
the two interference effects since it can result in loss of the entire DTT service,
rather than just the MUX being broadcast on the channel(s) affected by ACI.
The maps below illustrate the overlap that occurs between areas predicted to
suffer from receiver overload and ACI within the North Copenhagen sample area,
for each of the networks considered. It also illustrates that ACI affects more DTT
households than receiver overload. As noted previously, in the North
Copenhagen sample area considered, all of the predicted ACI falls outside urban
areas.
31
The North Copenhagen sample area was chosen because it contains a distribution of different
geo-types and because a similar area was assessed in our initial analysis in Section 3 in our initial
analysis of receiver overload.
59
Figure 27
Network A in FDD1/FDD2 [Source: Analysys Mason]
60
Figure 28
Network B in FDD1/FDD2 [Source: Analysys Mason]
61
Figure 29
Network C in FDD1/FDD2 [Source: Analysys Mason]
4.5 Impact of realistic EIRP levels on ACI in DTT Channel 60 areas

The analysis described in the previous sections focuses on an area to the north
of Copenhagen which is served by DTT Channel 59. However, as indicated by
our initial analysis in Section 3, it is areas using Channel 60 that are likely to
suffer the most ACI, due to the smaller frequency separation between LTE
Channel FDD1 and DTT Channel 60, compared to between FDD1 and DTT
Channel 59.
To consider the impact of ACI on DTT Channel 60, we selected an area of
Denmark served by Channel 60, in order to repeat our analysis using realistic
EIRP levels for LTE base stations within the selected area.
The area selected is between Ringsted and Sor, as illustrated below. The total
number of households within the Ringsted-Sor sample area is 27 491 and the
total area is 705.20 km2. This area was selected for further analysis because our
initial analysis suggested that this area might be particularly susceptible to ACI
(as indicated in Figure C.2 in annex C of this report), possibly due to there being
62
a lower DTT field strength in parts of this area, as a result of its location relative
to the nearest DTT transmitters32.
Figure 30 Selected Ringsted-Sor sample area for ACI Channel 60 analysis

[Source: NITA]
We followed the same approach as described in Section 4.1 to determine an
individual EIRP per site for several LTE800 networks, assuming that LTE800 is
deployed on existing GSM900 sites in the area.
For each of the three networks, we firstly assigned a geo-type for each of the
existing GSM900 sites in the area, illustrated below.
32
The area is served by two DTT transmitters Vordingborg and Jyderup, however the city of
Ringsted, which appeared from our initial analysis to be particularly affected by ACI, is located
between the two sites and so is possibly receiving a lower field strength relative to other areas
located closer to one of the sites.
63
Figure 31
Geo-types assigned to existing GSM900 sites in RingstedSor [Source: Analysys Mason]
This resulted in the following distribution of sites per geo-type, per GSM900
network in the Ringsted-Sor sample area.
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Network A
11
Network B
10
21
Network C
12
12
Table 27
Number of sites per geo-type within the Ringsted-Sor
It should be noted that because the sample area is a predominantly rural, it has a
significantly lower number of sites compared to the north Copenhagen area
considered in the previous section of this report.
We assigned an EIRP level to each site with the sample area, relative to the
distance from the nearest neighbouring site, as before.
Predicting coverage for each of the networks using the assigned EIRP levels in
our planning tool resulted in the following estimates of coverage within the
selected area.
64
Figure 32
Mason]
EIRP per site and coverage Network A [Source: Analysys
Figure 33
Mason]
EIRP per site and coverage Network B [Source: Analysys
Figure 34
Mason]
65
EIRP per site and coverage Network C [Source: Analysys
Assessing the potential for ACI from these LTE networks to households in the
Ringsted-Sor sample area using the same approach as described previously,
we found a reduction in the number of households affected by ACI from Network
A compared to our initial analysis (described in Section 3) where all sites use
their maximum licensed EIRP level. Networks B and C exhibited higher levels of
ACI that our initial analysis. This is primarily because Networks B and C both
contained more base station sites than the network we modelled our initial
analysis on although some of those base stations are at a lower power than
those assumed in our initial analysis33.
The results are shown in the tables below. As before, we repeated the analysis to
investigate the effect of different networks (A, B or C) using the lowermost LTE
channel nearest to DTT (i.e. LTE FDD1) and so the results for each network are
presented below.
33
Because of the predominantly rural nature of the Ringsted-Sor area it should be noted that
many of the base stations in our optimised network were estimated to require between 54 and 56
dBm EIPR using our approach to calculating EIRP relative to the nearest neighbouring site,
66
DTT households
Percentage of
affected
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
affected
Network A
(FDD1/FDD2)
370
6.7%
20
2.9%
Network B
148
2.7%
0.9%
50
0.91%
0.2%
(FDD3/FDD4)
Network C
(FDD5/FDD6)
Table 28
ACI per network Network A in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]
DTT households
affected
Percentage of
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
affected
Network B
588
10.7%
33
4.7%
159
2.9%
0.7%
43
0.8%
0.2%
(FDD1/FDD2
Network C
(FDD3/FDD4)
Network A
(FDD5/FDD6)
Table 29
ACI per network Network B in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]
DTT households
affected
Percentage of
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
affected
Network C
580
3.7%
26
3.7%
124
2.3%
0.5%
38
0.7%
0.3%
(FDD1/FDD2
Network A
(FDD3/FDD4)
Network B
(FDD5/FDD6)
Table 30
ACI per network Network C in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:
Analysys Mason]
The areas affected in each case are illustrated in the maps below.
Figure 35
Analysys Mason]
Figure 36
Analysys Mason]
67
68
Figure 37
Analysys Mason]
The results show that Networks B and C using LTE blocks FDD1/FDD2 affected
more households compared to Network A using the same frequency blocks. This
is potentially because Networks B and C provide a higher proportion of
population coverage around the Ringsted city area than Network A, where there
is a higher concentration of households affected by ACI.
Within Network A there is only one existing GSM900 site close to the Ringsted
city area and so, although we have assumed that this site operates at a
maximum licensed EIRP of 56 dBm, the percentage of population coverage from
Network A is lower than provided by Networks B and C.
It is also noted that whilst it was possible to reduce the EIRP levels for some sites
with the selected area within our revised analysis, compared to the maximum
levels assumed in our initial analysis, a number of sites in each network in our
revised analysis remained at the maximum EIRP level of 56 dBm.
This is because the selected Ringsted-Sor area is a predominately rural area
with fewer GSM900 sites than other suburban or urban areas, and hence use of
the maximum allowed EIRP is necessary to provide sufficient area coverage.
We also believe that lower DTT wanted field strengths assumed within our model
in the Ringsted city area are potentially contributing to the level of ACI that our
model has estimated. According to the revised Danish DTT plan (described
earlier in this report), there are two DTT sites serving the Ringsted-Sor area, but
the Ringsted city area (where our modelling indicates ACI to be particularly
prevalent), sits between the coverage of the two sites. This suggests the wanted
field strength to Ringsted might be lower than the field strength received at other
conurbations within the area that are located closer to one of the DTT site, as
illustrated in the diagram below.
69
Legend
DTT coverage from
site JYDERUP
DTT coverage from
site VORDINGBORG
Location of households
Figure 38
Density of households near Ringsted city area [Source:
Analysys Mason]
Extrapolating the ACI results from our Ringsted-Sor sample area to a national
level (i.e. for all areas of the country where Channel 60 is used) provides the
results below, suggesting that between 4 500 and 5 000 DTT households could
be affected nationally by ACI from Network A in our analysis using FDD1. This
number could increase to between 7000 and 7 500 if Networks B or C use blocks
FDD1 and FDD234. This compares to our previous estimate (from our initial
analysis in Section 3) of around 5 600 DTT viewing households in channel 60
areas being affected from ACI from an LTE network using block FDD1.
However, it is possible that our extrapolation to a national figure in this case is
misleading, because of the specific characteristics of DTT coverage in the
sample area and in particular around the Ringsted city area that we believe has
led to a higher predicted number of households affected by ACI in that area.
Extrapolating that result could therefore result in an over prediction of households
likely to be affected within Channel 60 areas nationally. We would therefore
recommend caution when interpreting these figures and expect that the actual
number of households affected by ACI within Channel 60 areas across Denmark
may be less that the numbers predicted by our extrapolation from the RingstedSor sample area.
It should also be noted that the difference in results between Network A and
Networks B and C reflects the different coverage levels between the three
networks in our modelling, Network A has a lower number of base stations
34
We have scaled the results from the Ringsted-Sor sample area to the national area of Denmark
by geo-type.
70
within the Ringsted-Sor area than Networks B and C and therefore the coverage
from Network A is lower than the equivalent coverage from Networks B and C.
DTT households
affected
Percentage of
households
Area affected
Percentage of
(km )
total area
affected
Network A
4 750
7.0%
192
2.9%
Network B
7 265
10.7%
314
4.8%
Network C
7 250
10.7%
248
3.8%
Table 31
LTE EIRP levels, scaled nationally [Source: Analysys Mason]
4.6 Effect on indoor coverage

Noting that some households do not receive DTT services using an externally
mounted antenna, but use portable antennas indoors, we have repeated the ACI
analysis for the selected Channel 60 Ringsted-Sor sample area, as described in
the previous section, to consider the impact on households if portable indoor
reception is assumed. It should be noted that indoor DTT coverage in this area is
very limited due to low DTT field strength.
For this analysis, rather than the correction values listed in Table 6 in Section 2,
we have applied a locations margin of 22dB (from section 6.2.3 of the JTG 5/6
methodology), and an indoor reception correction factor of 8.2dB (from Table 4 of
ECC Report 148).
The PR values for indoor coverage, with correction factors, assumed in our
analysis are therefore in Table 12 below.
DTT/LTE channel
FDD1
FDD3
FDD5
60
-6
-14
-19
Table 32
PR values plus correction factors, Channel 60 coverage,
portable indoor reception [Source: Analysys Mason]
A 3dB polarisation discrimination value used in our earlier analysis also no longer
applies. This is because, for portable reception, an omnidirectional antenna
pattern is normally assumed, and hence neither directivity nor polarisation
discrimination is applied.
The minimum median field strength for portable reception is assumed to be
66dBV/m, which is calculated from the original value of 58dBV/m for outdoor
coverage for the Boxer DTT network, plus an in-building penetration loss of
8dB35.
35
We have also re-predicted field strength maps for LTE coverage relative to a 1.5 metre receiving
height for DTT.
71
Results are shown below. As with previous analysis, we have repeated the
analysis to illustrate the effect of the different LTE networks (A, B and C) using
the lowermost LTE channel (FDD1).
DTT households
affected
Percentage of
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
affected
Network A
(FDD1/FDD2)
216
3.9%
11
1.6%
Network B
70
1.3%
0.6%
29
0.5%
0.2%
(FDD3/FDD4)
Network C
(FDD5/FDD6)
Table 33
ACI per network for indoor coverage Network A in blocks
FDD1/FDD2 [Source: Analysys Mason]
DTT households
Percentage of
affected
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
area affected
affected
Network B
279
5.1%
17
2.5%
84
1.5%
0.5%
31
0.6%
0.1%
(FDD1/FDD2
Network C
(FDD3/FDD4)
Network A
(FDD5/FDD6)
Table 34
ACI per network for indoor coverage Network B in blocks
DTT households
Percentage of
Area affected
Percentage of
affected
households
(km2)
area affected
affected
Network C
290
5.3%
14
2%
71
1.3%
0.4%
23
0.4%
0.2%
(FDD1/FDD2
Network A
(FDD3/FDD4)
Network B
(FDD5/FDD6)
Table 35
ACI per network for indoor coverage Network C in blocks
The areas affected in each case are illustrated in the maps below, which illustrate
that the locations of households predicted to be affected by ACI are similar for
indoor and outdoor reception (i.e. by comparing these results with those
presented in Figure 35, Figure 36 and Figure 37).
72
Figure 39
Areas affected by ACI (indoor reception) Network A in
Figure 40
Areas affected by ACI (indoor reception) Network B in
73
Figure 41
Areas affected by ACI (indoor reception) Network C in
Extrapolating the ACI results from the Ringsted-Sor sample area to a national
level (i.e. for indoor reception for all areas of the country where Channel 60 is
used) provides the results below, suggesting that between 2 800 and 3 700 DTT
households would be affected by ACI from a network using LTE blocks
FDD1/FDD2 for indoor reception36.
Households
affected
Percentage of
households
Area affected
2
Percentage of
(km )
total area
affected
Network A
2840
4.2%
104
1.6%
Network B
3441
5.1%
165
2.5%
Network C
3622
5.3%
136
2.1%
Table 36
LTE EIRP levels, scaled nationally, indoor coverage [Source: Analysys
Mason]
These results are consistent with the results from our earlier analysis of indoor
coverage (described in Section 3.2), where we found that the number of
households affected by ACI for indoor reception could be slightly lower than the
equivalent number affected if fixed outdoor reception is assumed.
36
We have scaled the results from the Ringsted-Sorsample area to the national area of Denmark
by geo-type.
74
4.7 Effect of site sharing between the three networks

We have also evaluated the impact of increased site sharing between the three
networks. This is expected to reduce receiver overload since the overall number
of sites within the area will be reduced. We estimate that within the North
Copenhagen sample area, mobile operators currently share about 23% of their
sites. For our analysis, we have increased this to 30%, as shown below.
Total sites
Sites shared
Sites shared
Percentage site
amongst two
amongst three
share
operators
operators
Existing site sharing
311
57
15
23%
Increased site sharing
311
78
15
30%
Table 37
Site sharing in North Copenhagen sample area [Source:
Analysys Mason]
The results of our analysis are shown in Table 38 below. They suggest that
increasing site sharing and using realistic EIRP levels are effective as a means of
substantially reducing the risk of receiver overload. It is expected that operators
will voluntarily deploy a combination of both reduced EIRP and increased site
sharing within urban areas in particular in order to comply with planning
regulations and to deal with a lack of availability of base station sites, as well as
other practical considerations.
DTT
Percentage of
households
households
Area affected
Percentage of
total area
affected
Receiver overload with
reduced EIRP levels
163
0.5%
1.76
0.3%
Receiver overload with

reduced EIRP levels and
increased site sharing
34
0.1%
0.43
0.1%
Table 38
The effect of using realistic LTE EIRP levels and increased
site sharing on receiver overload [Source: Analysys Mason]
4.8 Near-field interference effects

Within the near field of LTE antennas, propagation characteristics vary from the
typical far field range assumed within our analysis37. Accordingly, a household
located within the near field of an antenna will typically experience more
interference that one located in the far field.
37
The electromagnetic field of an antenna in the far field (free space assumptions) generally falls in
amplitude by 1/r (meaning that the total energy per unit area at a distance r is proportional to 1/r 2).
In the near field, by contrast, the energy level and coupling mechanism is very variable.
75
We estimate that the near field range of an LTE800 antenna will be around 20
metres, and on this basis we have estimated the number of households within
this distance of our modelled base stations (noting that our modelling is based on
existing 900MHz site locations). We estimate that around 217 households in the
north of Copenhagen area used in the analysis through this section of the report
are located within the near field of an LTE base station from one LTE network.
However, since some LTE sites of different networks are very close together and
therefore affect the same household, our estimate is that the total number of
households affected is only 191.
Considering this effect across Denmark (assuming LTE800 is deployed on
existing GSM900 sites of the three 2G mobile operators), we estimate that up to
500 households in total could be located within 20 metres of an LTE800 antenna.
The total equivalent area affected (i.e. the sum of the areas located within 20
metres of LTE800 antennas, nationally across Denmark) is 5.13 km382.
4.9 Summary of results

Our detailed analysis of the effect of varying the LTE base station EIRP at
individual sites is a more realistic simulation of actual LTE network deployments
compared to our initial analysis which used the maximum licensed EIRP at all
sites (59dBm, or 56dBm in Channel 60 areas). The results of this more detailed
analysis suggest that ACI could affect more households than receiver overload
when taking into account the effects of lowering EIRP at individual base station
sites, but the numbers affected by both blocking and ACI are substantially lower
than in our initial analysis (with the exception of the analysis of ACI to the
selected Channel 60 area, which, as described, we believe highlights a particular
issue associated with low DTT wanted field strength in that area, which is
affecting the potential for ACI).
In particular, we found that the effect of reducing EIRP at individual sites means
that the percentage of households predicted to be affected by receiver overload
in urban areas of the country could be substantially reduced (and since our initial
model suggested the highest proportion of ACI occurs in urban areas, the EIRP
reduction per site in urban areas leads to a substantially lower overall number of
households affected by overload). The majority of households affected by
receiver overload and ACI in our more detailed analysis are now located in
suburban and rural areas, and not urban areas, with a much lower overall
number of households affected.
From the results obtained for the sample areas modelled, the following key points
should be noted:
38
The results we have presented are for sample areas to the north of
Copenhagen and around Ringsted-Sor. We have assumed that three
networks are deployed, each using 2x10 MHz of spectrum from the
800MHz band. The site density per network, site locations and heights are
based upon existing GSM900 network deployments. EIRP levels have
This area corresponds to 4 824 base stations with a near field area of radii 20 metres.
76
been theoretically derived using an EIRP-to-site-separation relationship,

developed based upon the LTE link budget derived by Analysys Mason
for this study, and contained in Annex D.
Using these assumptions regarding the LTE network design, we have

found that there is a substantial reduction in the number of households
affected by receiver overload, compared to the initial analysis assuming
all sites radiate at their maximum licensed limit. We have also found that
the number of households predicted to be affected by ACI in the North of
Copenhagen area (where DTT Channel 59 is used) is substantially lower
from our more detailed analysis in view of reduction in EIRP levels applied
at individual sites. For the Ringsted-Sor area, where DTT Channel 60 is
used, we found a reduction in ACI from our more detailed analysis for one
of the networks modelled (Network A). This network is the most similar to
the characteristics of the LTE800 network we assumed in our initial
analysis. In our more detailed analysis, we also considered two other
network configurations referred to as Networks B and C which have a
higher density of base station sites than Network A. Although in some
cases this higher density of sites leads to a corresponding reduction in
EIRP (and therefore lower ACI), we found for the Ringsted-Sor area that
we had to use the highest level of EIRP (56 dBm) at a number of sites in
order to provide coverage across the predominantly rural area. We
believe that this, along with the specific characteristics of the DTT
coverage in that area, has led to our model predicting higher levels of ACI
for Networks B and C in that area compared to Network A, which has a
lower overall coverage due to less base station sites.
Within the North of Copenhagen sample area, we found that our more
detailed model predicts that the three LTE800 networks will result in
around 160 DTT viewing households being subject to receiver overload
(summing the individual effects of each of the networks). This suggests
approximately 0.6% of the DTT households in the area might be affected.
Extrapolating this result nationally suggests between 2 500 and 3 000
DTT households might be affected by blocking from at least one of the
three LTE networks, assuming those networks use varying EIRP levels
per site consistent with the geo-type of the area and the proximity of sites.
This compares to up to 150 000 DTT households estimated to be affected
by overload from our initial analysis, if all sites in three national LTE
networks operate at maximum licensed power. The use of more realistic
EIRP levels per site therefore results in a 98% reduction in the number of
households subject to receiver overload.
We believe that the use of lower EIRP levels at individual LTE sites is a
better representation of how LTE networks will be deployed in practice,
because in practice operators face various practical constraints that limit
the power level from individual sites and will therefore tend to use lower
EIRP levels at some sites, particularly in urban areas. Such constraints
might include restrictions on antenna heights, restrictions due to mast
sharing, and use of combiners and other RF equipment (e.g. to integrate
800MHz and 900MHz networks), which will cause losses that will reduce
the radiated power in practice.
For ACI, we have found that the number of households affected in a given
area depends on the LTE network deployment, as well as the
77
characteristics of DTT coverage in the area. We have evaluated the

difference between three LTE network deployments, each modelled
based upon existing GSM900 site locations, but using realistic EIRP
levels for LTE deployment. For the three networks modelled, we found the
ACI caused by each individual network using LTE blocks FDD1/FDD2
affects between 290 and 485 DTT households within the north of
Copenhagen area depending on the LTE network deployment (this
represents ACI to DTT services using Channel 59, since Channel 60 is
not used within this area). Extrapolating these numbers nationally (within
areas of Denmark using Channel 59), it is estimated that around 2 000
DTT households might be subject to ACI from an LTE network using
channels FDD1/FDD2. These numbers can be compared to our original
estimate of 4 800 DTT households affected by ACI within Channel 59
areas, suggesting that the modelling of realistic LTE EIRP levels results in
nearly 60% reduction in ACI from LTE blocks FDD1/FDD2 into DTT
Channel 59.
For the three networks modelled in the Ringsted-Sor area, we found that
ACI could affect between 370 and 590 households in the area in total.
Extrapolating these results national suggests between 4 500 and 5 000
DTT households located within Channel 60 areas nationally could be
subject to ACI from an LTE800 network based upon the Network A in our
detailed analysis. This can be compared to the 5 600 DTT viewing
households potentially affected, based upon our initial analysis,
confirming that optimising the EIRP level at individual sites has a positive
impact in terms of reducing the number of households potentially affected
by ACI. However, we found by extrapolating our results for Networks B
and C that additional households could be affected, up to between 7 000
and 7 500. We believe this is due to the higher site density (and therefore
increased coverage) of those networks compared to Network A,
particularly around the Ringsted city area, where both networks have
more sites leading to a higher percentage of population coverage.
However, we believe that the primary cause of the higher number of
households affected in this area is due to the particular characteristics of
DTT coverage, as described previously.
The potential for individual households to receive interference is

influenced by the location of households with respect to LTE base stations
(for receiver overload) and also by the DTT field strength received by the
household (for ACI). Our analysis also suggests that the characteristics of
the LTE network in terms of the number of base stations and the EIRP per
base station is relevant. We have demonstrated that networks with more
base stations typically require less power per base station (if EIRP is
determined for individual sites relative to the nearest neighbouring site).
Lowering the EIRP in turn leads to a reduction in households suffering
DTT receiver overload.
It is noted that there will be a very small number of households located

within the near field of LTE antennas that may suffer more interference
than predicted from our modelling, since our propagation model is
applicable for modelling of far field effects. Using the existing 900MHz
base station locations as a basis, and taking account of the fact that a few
households are located very close to base stations of more than one
78
mobile network, we estimate around 500 DTT households lie within the
near field of an LTE800 antenna.
We have noted the following areas of uncertainty within our modelling:
There are various different approaches to deploying LTE, and mobile

operators will typically adopt a particular approach to reflect their
particular coverage and capacity objectives, and existing site grids. We
expect operators with existing GSM900 networks will, over time, deploy
LTE800 equipment at all or the majority of existing GSM900 sites, for
coverage reasons. Additional LTE capacity might be provided using other
frequency bands (e.g. 1800MHz, 2100MHz, 2600MHz), which might
share the same sites, or use different sites, but will not interfere with DTT.
Although the ideal solution for operators is to optimise the EIRP per site to
manage interference levels within the network, in reality operators may
have a standard EIRP design at selected sites during the initial rollout of
LTE800. It is expected that this might be optimised over time such that
operators will deploy a range of base station powers over time taking
account of various factors. Therefore, the EIRP level at individual LTE
sites, as well as the number of sites employed, will change as networks
evolve. It is also noted that power control within LTE networks will be
used to optimise the radiated power depending on local conditions and
location of users within a cell. In addition, LTE is expected to use MIMO
(Multiple In, Multiple Out) antennas that will also influence instantaneous
radiated power.
Susceptibility to interference will be affected by the type of DTT

installation being used, as well as the quality of DTT coverage being
received. In particular the use of different antenna systems and amplifiers
may impact whether a household receives receiver overload and/or ACI.
This has not been accounted for in our modelling and would require
further detailed investigation by NITA. Our modelling does account for
variability in DTT coverage, since we have used field strength maps
obtained from DTT broadcasters in Denmark as the basis of determining
DTT field strengths for our analysis. Our results highlight that households
in areas receiving a weaker DTT field strength are more susceptible to
ACI.
Our extrapolation of results for the Ringsted-Sor area should be treated

with caution, in view of the particular characteristics of DTT coverage in
that area (and potential low wanted DTT field strengths around Ringsted),
which we believe has contributed to a higher concentration of households
affected by ACI within that area. This applies to both indoor and outdoor
DTT coverage. Extrapolating those results nationally is therefore likely to
lead to an over estimation of the actual number of households likely to be
affected by ACI in Channel 60 areas.
79

There are a number of mitigation measures that can be used to restore DTT
services and/or mitigate the risk of receiver overload and ACI occurring. In this
section, we describe a range of possible mitigation techniques that can be
envisaged, and consider the effect of each technique individually.
It is noted that the analysis presented in Section 4 suggests that if realistic EIRP
levels are assumed per base station (rather than all base stations radiating at
their maximum licensed level), the number of households potentially subject to
receiver overload and/or ACI reduces substantially. The mitigation techniques
considered in this section can therefore be considered to be options to mitigate
interference over and above the optimisation of LTE base station EIRP as
described in the previous section.
5.1 Use of DTT receiver filters

The technical feasibility of DTT receiver filtering has been addressed in various
published studies39. Low-pass filters (sometimes referred to as band rejection
filters) can be used as a means of restoring DTT services by filtering out the LTE
interference at the DTT receiver, without otherwise affecting DTT reception40.
These filters work by attenuating the power received in the DTT channel from the
LTE base station(s), thereby increasing the DTT carrier-to-interference (C/I)
ratio41, which prevents the receiver being affected by ACI or receiver overload
(depending on the level of attenuation that the filter provides into the affected
DTT channel).
Low-pass UHF filters are available within the European market today, and
information we have obtained from one filter manufacturer suggests the unit cost
is around EUR1015. A consultation document published by the UK Office of
Communications also suggests a cost of GBP1042. Different models are available
to attenuate interference to DTT services using Channels 58, 59 and 60 (i.e.
type 58, type 59 and type 60 filters).43
39
For example, a study by Cobham Technical Services for the UK Office of Communications,
submitted to the ECC, see
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/ddr/statement/ERA2.pdf
40
It is noted that insertion loss of up to a few dBs might occur based upon typical filter
specifications. This is not expected to affect reception of DTT services other than to a small
proportion of households who might be receiving a weak DTT field strength.
41
C/I ratio is described in ECC Report 148 as being The ratio, generally expressed in dB, of the
power of the wanted signal to the total power of interfering signals and noise, evaluated at the
receiver input.
42
See page 29 of
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/dtt/summary/dttcondoc.pdf
43
Braun Telecom indicates that filter model LPF-774-LONG is available for protection of channel
58, LPF-782-LONG for protection of channel 59 and LPF-790-LONG for protection of Channel 60.
80
The interference attenuation that each filter provides depends upon the
frequency separation between the LTE interference and the DTT reception,
meaning that attenuation is lower for interference into Channel 60 compared to
Channels 59 and 58, since Channels 59 and 58 have a greater frequency
separation from the 800MHz band. An example of typical attenuation and
insertion loss44 is shown in Figure 42 below, provided by Braun Telecom.
Figure 42
Characteristics of UHF filter [Source: Braun Telecom]
Based on the figure above, which represents the LPF-790-LONG filter model for
DTT Channel 60, we have estimated the following attenuation from LTE
emissions can be achieved:
from FDD1, around 5dB

from FDD4 and above, more than 20dB.
The typical insertion loss is 3dB or less, thus the typical C/I improvement for
Channel 60 is around 2dB for FDD1, 5dB from FDD2, 12dB from FDD3 and
greater than 17dB for FDD4 and above. For Channel 59, the typical C/I
improvement is expected to be better than 5dB for FDD1.
To illustrate the effectiveness of filters being added to the DTT receive path, we
have assessed the impact of an extra 5dB and 10 dB attenuation being added to
our modelling of the calculated probability of receiver overload. The results are
summarised in the table below, relative to the number of households we
predicted might be affected by receiver overload from our detailed network
44
Insertion loss refers to the loss of DTT signal power resulting from insertion of a filter in the
receive path.
81
analysis for the North of Copenhagen area, described in the previous section.
Applying 5 dB and 10 dB of attenuation to that analysis, respectively, we have
calculated the percentage reduction in the number of households and area
affected by receiver overload and ACI, as shown below.
Filter attenuation
(dB)
Affected area
2
(km )
Affected area
Affected DTT
Affected
(% of total in
households
households (% of
sample area)
(number)
total in sample
area)
No filters
0.97
0.2%
111
0.4
0.32
0.1%
30
0.1
10
0.1
0.0%
0.0
Table 39
Estimated reduction in the potential for blocking from use of
DTT receiver filters using realistic EIRP analysis for selected Channel 59
area [Source: Analysys Mason]
Filter attenuation
(dB)
Affected area
2
(km )
Affected area (%
Affected DTT
Affected
of total in sample
households
households (% of
area)
(number)
total in sample
area)
No filters
3.63
0.6
485
1.6
1.07
0.2
167
0.5
10
0.37
0.1
36
0.1
Table 40
Estimated reduction in the potential for ACI from use of DTT
receiver filters using realistic EIRP analysis for selected Channel 59 area
These results suggest a 73% reduction in the number of households subject to
receiver blocking for a filter providing 5dB of attenuation, and 95% for a filter
providing 10dB of attenuation. For ACI, the percentage reduction is 65% for a
filter providing 5dB of attenuation and 93% for 10dB of attenuation.
We have also considered the impact of filters providing 5dB of attenuation on the
potential for ACI to households in the Ringsted-Sor area. Results from this
analysis are presented below.
82
Filter attenuation
(dB)
Affected area
2
(km )
Affected area (%
Affected DTT
Affected
of total in sample
households
households (% of
area)
(number)
total in sample
area)
No filters
2.9
370
6.7
193
3.5
Table 41
Estimated reduction in the potential for ACI from use of DTT
receiver filters using realistic EIRP analysis for selected Ringsted-Sor area
These results therefore suggest a 47% reduction in the number of households
subject to ACI in the selected Channel 60 area, if a filter provides 5 dB of
attenuation.
In practice, it should be noted that different levels of attenuation will be required
for different households, depending on the DTT channel(s) being used and the
source of LTE interference. We have not evaluated the precise level of
attenuation required at each household within the sample areas of our modelling
as part of this study.
As noted from the filter characteristics provided by Braun Telecom, it is possible
that filters will not fully mitigate interference from the lowermost LTE block
(FDD1) into DTT Channel 60 because the filter does not provide sufficient
attenuation (i.e. limited to 2dB or less). Our modelling results described above
suggests that filters can be expected to substantially mitigate interference
between all other frequency combinations of LTE and DTT where attenuation of
10dB or greater is achieved and provide some mitigation where 5dB of
attenuation is achieved. However, specifically for Channel 60 ACI from FDD1,
filtering is only able to provide limited mitigation (approximately 2dB) due to the
very limited frequency separation (of 1 MHz).
5.2 Mitigation via additional filtering on LTE base stations

We note that the use of additional filtering on LTE base stations (possibly in
combination with rejection filters on DTT receivers) could further reduce the
potential for ACI and receiver overload interference in some cases.
The use of additional LTE base station filters was previously studied within the
CEPT Spectrum Engineering (SE) 42 committee, suggesting limited impact with
respect to reducing ACI. However, it is possible that LTE base station filters can
have some benefit by reducing the out-of-band component of base station
interference (often referred to as spectral leakage). We estimate this could
provide around 5dB of additional reduction in the out-of-band component of ACI.
Combined with filtering at DTT receivers, this could result in an additional C/I
improvement compared to that achieved using the low pass filters described in
the previous section alone.
As illustration of this, a consultation document published by the UK Office of
Communications also suggests that additional base station transmitter filtering
is particularly effective when used in combination with DTT filtering in areas
83
which use either Channel 59 or 60 for DTT 45. The consultation document found
that the incremental cost of higher quality filters (over and above those needed
to comply with the out-of-block emission limits set by the Decision) is around
GBP40-GBP70 per antenna, or GBP240-GBP420 per base station and
concluded that mitigation via LTE base station filters was an effective and costefficient mitigation technique.
The ECs 800 MHz Decision specifies Block Edge Masks (BEM) that LTE800
base stations must comply with, as described earlier in this report. It is expected
that some base station filtering will be required to comply with these masks.46
Additional filtering could result in reduced interference into DTT services, as
described above. The main downside of this for mobile operators is an increase
in the cost of deployment per base station as a result of the increased filtering
cost (as illustrated by the UK Office of Communications estimates above).
Additional filtering also requires extra space to be available at base station sites,
although more recent approaches to filter technology aim to reduce their size,
weight and power consumption, as well as to achieve a very small insertion loss
(i.e. the small loss of signal power that results from insertion of the filter at the
base station, leading to reduction in transmitted power).
5.3 Use of cross-polarisation between LTE and DTT

Improving the field strength of the DTT service is a possible form of ACI
mitigation that has been considered in various studies. One way of achieving this
is to use cross-polarisation of antennas between LTE and DTT (i.e. using the
opposite of DTT polarisation at LTE base stations).
DTT transmissions in Denmark use a mixture of horizontal and vertical
polarisation horizontal polarisation is generally used at main transmitters, and
vertical polarisation at relay sites.47 Mobile networks use a range of antenna
types and polarisation. Vertical polarisation used to be common, but slant
polarisation at 45 degrees to the horizontal is now often used. Frequently, these
slant systems are configured so that base stations transmit on one of the
polarisation paths whilst receiving on both, thereby providing a higher diversity
gain for the received signal.
From the point-of-view of interference to DTT services, slant polarisation is
estimated to provide 3dB discrimination between the LTE and the DTT signal (as
indicated in Section 4.2.2.4 of the ITU-R JTG 5/6 methodology for sharing studies
45
See page 31 of
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/dtt/summary/dttcondoc.pdf
46
For example, as noted in ECC Report 148, additional band pass RF filtering with sufficient
attenuation is required to reduce the emissions from the levels set by the 3GPP LTE spectrum
emission mask down to the appropriate regulatory BEM baseline limit
47
One main DTT site in the Danish network, Thisted, uses vertical polarisation.
84
between the mobile service and DTT)48. In the analysis presented in Sections 2
and 4 of this report, we have assumed that LTE networks use slant polarisation
and so have assumed 3dB discrimination exists.
Studies published by CEPT and the ITU-R have shown that use of vertical
antennas would provide increased discrimination to the main DTT stations, and
16dB is usually assumed as the discrimination loss between vertical and
horizontal polarisations. This additional discrimination could therefore provide
additional mitigation against receiver overload and ACI, by increasing the
difference between unwanted LTE and wanted DTT signal levels at affected DTT
households.
Our estimate is that the addition of 16 dB discrimination into our modelled
interference scenarios could result in up to 90% reduction in the number of
households affected by ACI and blocking.
It is noted that use of cross-polarisation discrimination as a means of ACI or
receiver overload interference mitigation requires LTE antennas to be vertically
polarised if DTT networks use horizontal polarisation, which could limit the
capabilities of LTE networks, affecting coverage and capacity. In addition, in
Denmark most main DTT transmitters are horizontally polarised though a few
main transmitters, and most on-channel repeaters (DTT gap fillers), are vertically
polarised.
This means that cross-polarisation is not a mitigation technique that can be
applied throughout networks in Denmark, but can possibly be applied in selected
areas only receiving a DTT service from a horizontally polarised main transmitter.
5.4 Improving the DTT signal level via on-channel repeaters

An alternative means of improving DTT field strength is to co-site additional in-fill
DTT transmitters with LTE base stations. These gap fillers are termed
on-channel repeaters (OCRs), and have the effect of increasing the power of the
DTT signal, which means that more households receive a better quality DTT
signal. This also reduces the difference between the wanted and the interfering
signal levels, and is therefore particularly associated with reducing the impact of
interference caused by ACI.
OCRs are an alternative to frequency-shifting repeaters (which receive the DTT
signal from a parent site and transpose it to a different frequency). Although such
repeaters are a way to enhance DTT coverage, their use has spectrum
implications for the DTT network, since there is a requirement for sufficient
frequencies to be available in order to transpose the signal to a different channel.
In contrast, OCRs re-broadcast the DTT signal using the same channel as the
parent site, thereby avoiding the need for extra channels to be available. An
OCR operates by receiving the DTT signal off-the-air, amplifying it and then reradiating it. This reduces the degradation in signal-to-interference plus noise ratio
48
See ITU-R R07-JTF5-6 Annex 6 to Joint Task Group 5-6 Chairmans Report: Methodologies
(including interference objectives) for sharing studies between the mobile service, on the one hand,
and the terrestrial broadcasting, on the other hand, in the band 790-862 MHz.
85
(SINR) by increasing the level of the DTT signal at the victim DTT receiver.
Co-siting an OCR on the LTE base station may therefore mitigate the ACI caused
by that base station.
However, addition of OCRs can lead to additional interference within the DTT
network (either co-channel or adjacent channel) and so careful positioning of
OCRs is required to achieve sufficient isolation between the OCR and the main
DTT site. For this reason, use of OCRs is not practical in all areas within the DTT
network, but they can be used in areas where LTE sites are located near to the
edge of the coverage area of a DTT site, which will benefit from increasing the
power of the DTT signal to overcome the LTE ACI.
It is noted that the use of OCRs may require DTT viewing households to re-orient
antennas to the new OCR site. This would normally require a visit from a trained
antenna installer to complete the re-orientation, and so there would be a cost
incurred by each household requiring this.
Our estimate is that that the addition of OCRs will be successful in reducing ACI
in up to 90% of cases, but does not eliminate it.
It is also noted that the feasibility in practice of deploying additional repeaters
within the DTT networks in Denmark would require further practical investigation
using field trials in particular, whether sufficient space and facilities exist at LTE
base station sites to enable OCRs to be co-sited, and whether sufficient isolation
between the repeater receiving antenna and the LTE transmitting antenna can be
ensured by appropriate site mounting.
Additional capital costs are also incurred within the DTT network to deploy OCRs.
Our estimate is that the cost of a single OCR is around EUR10 000, plus
associated site and installation costs of around EUR5000. There will also be a
cost of re-orientating antennas at affected households. Further study would be
required in order to identify the number of units that might be required across the
DTT network in Denmark noting, as described previously, that the addition of
OCRs is practical only in selected areas of the DTT network. Accordingly, other
means of interference mitigation described earlier in this report, such as filtering,
are expected to be more widely deployed and will therefore have a greater impact
on reducing interference.
5.5 Mitigation via improving DTT receiver design

As described earlier in this report, ECC Report 148 gives protection ratios (PR)
and overload thresholds (Oth) for various DTT receiver types (can, silicon and
USB tuner). The measurements conducted to determine the protection ratios
illustrate performance differences between different DTT types.
As noted in this report, the potential for receiver blocking to occur to DTT
receivers depends in particular upon the Oth of the receiver, as well as the
distance between the LTE base station and the DTT receiver, and the LTE field
strength.
86
Throughout the analysis in this report, we have assumed an Oth value of -15
dBm, which can be considered as a conservative assumption, since ECC Report
148 describes measured values of between -15dBm and -5dBm. 49,50
In practice, the measurements conducted by the ECC demonstrate that there is
currently a significant variation between the Oth of different DTT receivers on
the market. For example:
10% of the worst performing receivers on the market have an Oth
of -15dBm
50% of the best performing receivers have an Oth of -5dBm
10% of the best performing receivers have an Oth of 0dBm.
A similar variation in performance levels is also illustrated by ECC Report 148 in
relation to protection ratio (PR) values relating to ACI. Again, measurements
suggest a 10dB variation between measured PR values for the worst performing
receivers compared to the best performing receivers.
The measurements in ECC Report 148 therefore demonstrate that it is possible,
through current DTT receiver design, for DTT receivers to achieve better
performance that the assumptions made in this report.
A possible means of mitigation against receiver overload could therefore be to
improve the immunity of DTT receivers, by designing them with a higher Oth. It is
feasible that a higher Oth limit could be specified within receiver standards for
DTT services, to ensure that future receivers are designed with a higher
threshold in mind. Similarly, receiver standards could also be specified to
include minimum PR levels determined with LTE interference in mind (noting that
DTT to DTT PR values are already provided e.g. in the ITU-R GE-06 agreement).
It is noted that improvements to receiver performance would not reduce the risk
of ACI and/or receiver overload in the short term (since the majority of
households will already possess one or more digital receivers designed to todays
standards). It would, however, reduce the risk of interference over the medium
term, once households upgrade their receivers in future.
To illustrate the potential effect of this, we have considered the effect of
increasing the Oth assumed within our analysis from -15dBm to
-5dBm for all DTT households. The results of the analysis are presented below,
relative to our initial analysis (based on a single LTE network deployed nationally
in which all LTE base stations radiate at their maximum licensed power). The
difference between the two thresholds in our analysis is 10 dB, and this
improvement produces an 87% reduction overall in the number of households
subject to receiver overload51.
49
-15dBm is the threshold at which 90% of the best performing equipment measured in ECC
Report 148 remained unaffected by blocking from LTE.
50
This is the typical range the full range of measurements described in ECC Report 148 range
from 03dBm to -26dBm.
51
These results compare the effect of increasing the Oth relative to our initial analysis described in
Section 3, but it is expected that a similar reduction will apply relative to the results using realistic
LTE EIRP levels, presented in Section 4.
Overload
Affected area
threshold (dBm)
(km )
87
Affected area
Affected DTT
Affected
(% of total in
households
households (% of
Denmark)
total in Denmark)
-15
1529
3.6%
54 045
2.3%
-5
156
0.4%
6 913
0.3%
Table 42
Impact of improving the blocking threshold modelled for
one LTE network interfering with DTT, operating at maximum licensed EIRP
It is noted that Denmark is unlikely to be able to implement such a change by
itself. DTT receiver manufacturers design and manufacture products with markets
much larger than Denmark in mind typically for markets the size of the EU.
Therefore, in order to implement such a higher Oth limit, Denmark would need to
coordinate the proposed changes with other countries, or indeed with the
European Commission. It might also be possible to require manufacturers to
make a clear declaration concerning the blocking performance of the receiver at
the point of sale (e.g. by incorporating a blocking requirement alongside the other
requirements that are already necessary to obtain the Boxer ready or other
similar logos for sale of TV receivers in Denmark.)
5.6 Platform change

It is also noted that in the absence of other suitable means of overcoming
interference to DTT, affected households could opt to receive digital TV services
via an alternative platform such as cable, satellite or IPTV. It is estimated that
around 20% of the Danish population currently receive digital TV services via
DTT compared to alternative platforms around 80% currently already use other
means of receiving digital television, mainly using cable networks.
We expect that very few households will need to migrate to another platform as a
result of interference from LTE, since very few households will be affected by
blocking and ACI if realistic LTE EIRP levels are used and other possible
mitigation measures such as those considered in this report are considered over
and above optimising the base station EIRP. It is expected that the few
households for which no suitable mitigation measure exists will predominantly be
those receiving TV services using Channel 60 and/or those located very close to
an LTE base station52.
It is noted that provision of targeted information to DTT households from LTE
operators timed with the launch of new LTE800 base stations could also be
helpful to alert viewers to potential issues, thus enabling consideration of suitable
mitigation measures, such as filters or other techniques, where required.
52
Within this report, we describe potential near-field effects, being localised effects of interference
where DTT receivers are located within a 20 metre radius of an LTE base station.
88
5.7 Other forms of mitigation

We also note that a sufficiently large guard band between the last DTT channel
and the first LTE channel would help to reduce ACI. However, this is spectrally
inefficient and therefore only a small guard band of 1MHz (between 790 and
791MHz) has been incorporated in the recommended European band plan. This
has been the assumption in our analysis.
89

In terms of the potential for interference from LTE mobiles to DTT, it is noted that
the European band plan for the 790862MHz band uses a reverse duplex
arrangement, i.e. the mobile transmit frequencies are in the upper part of the
band, rather than the usual convention of having the mobile transmit frequencies
in the lower part of the band. The reason this has been done is primarily because
of concerns associated with ACI and blocking from LTE devices to DTT
receivers, which could interfere at short distances when both are used within the
home. The 800MHz channel plan therefore provides some mitigation against ACI
from the LTE uplink through the frequency separation between the uplink
channels and the band edge with DTT.
However, with the frequency offset that the channel plan provides, there is still
the potential that LTE devices operating close to DTT receivers could cause
receiver overload. This is thought to be particularly the case for portable indoor
reception, since with fixed outdoor reception there is sufficient spatial separation
between the DTT receiver and the LTE transmitting device to mitigate
interference. Papers published by European Broadcast Union (EBU)53 suggest
that the potential for blocking to DTT receivers using fixed reception is very small,
and only a small percentage (1%) of receivers are affected. For portable
reception, however, the number affected is slightly higher. A paper published in
the UK54 suggests that for a typical handset EIRP of 25dBm and a received DTT
signal of -72dBm at the coverage edge, the maximum permitted level of handset
signal for the onset of failure would be -41dBm, suggesting a required isolation of
66dB between DTT antenna and LTE handset. This corresponds to a minimum
separation of 50 metres between handset and DTT antenna.
This is in contrast to other work conducted in the UK by Cobham Technical
Services and presented by the UK regulator to the ECC Task Group 4 during
2010.55 This paper presents a series of measurements undertaken in the UK to
assess the behaviour of a range of UHF DVB-T receivers when subjected to
interference from LTE. Measurements were conducted to assess the effect of
LTE terminals on DTT reception both from fixed outdoor antennas and from
portable indoor antennas. The radiated measurement results reported by
Cobham found that no interference was observed for the fixed outdoor antenna
scenario. For the portable indoor scenario, if no filter was used, one DTT receiver
type (super-heterodyne) was found to be problematic. In that case, interference
was found to occur with the LTE device transmitting at 11dBm at separation
distances of 2.5 metres between the LTE terminal and the portable antenna.
Other receiver types, which were shown to have better PR performance with
respect to LTE, were not interfered with by an LTE terminal at this separation
53
http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/events/ecs10/presentations/ebu_ecs10_workshop_sami.pdf
54
http://docbox.etsi.org/Etsi_Cenelec/PUBLIC%20FOLDER%20on%20DD/UK%20DKTN%20DD/
DCKTN%20Digital%20Dividend%20Technologies%20Spectrum%2011Jun10%20v11%20(SR).pdf
55
ECC TG4(10)317, UK measurements of LTE into DTT, presented to the 15th meeting of ECC
TG4
90
distance, unless the terminal was transmitting at close to its maximum value of
23dBm.
All of the measured interference effects were resolved by the introduction of a
low-pass filter in the TV receiving antenna set-up. The filter provided on average
20 to 25dB of improvement in interference margin.
With regards to mitigating blocking caused by LTE terminals, it is noted that
power control within LTE terminals ensures that the devices are usually operating
below their maximum power level, which provides mitigation in terms of the
potential for blocking of DTT portable indoor receivers. This point was made in a
contribution by the GSM Association to CENELEC in 2010,56 which suggested
that whilst the maximum power of an LTE terminal is 23dBm, for most of the time
the terminal will transmit at significantly less than its maximum output power.
Accordingly, it is not considered likely that interference from LTE devices to DTT
receivers will cause significant problems in practice, and as agreed with NITA, we
have not therefore explicitly modelled LTE uplink interference within this study.
56
GSM Association: Characteristics of mobile networks expected to be deployed in the 790862

MHz band, contribution to CENELEC TC 210 WG 10 Meeting #3, 17-18 May 2010.
91

7.1 Summary of the main interference issues
Our initial analysis as described in Section 3 assumed that all LTE base stations
transmit at their maximum licensed EIRP level. The purpose of this initial analysis
was to establish whether interference from LTE to DTT could potentially be a
problem.
Our conclusion from this initial analysis was that there is considerable potential
for interference between LTE and DTT. Of the two interference modes
considered (receiver overload, or blocking, and adjacent channel interference, or
ACI), overload was found to be the dominant mechanism. With one LTE network
providing nationwide coverage, and with base stations operating at their
maximum licensed power limit, we found that overload could potentially affect
around 54 000 DTT households, approximately 2.3% of the total DTT households
in Denmark. The deployment of three LTE networks (each using 2x10 MHz of
spectrum in the 800 MHz band) using maximum licensed EIRP at all sites has the
potential to increase this number by a factor of around 2.8. For a scenario where
three LTE networks operate nationally, with base station locations for each
modelled on existing GSM900 network designs, and with all transmitting at
maximum licensed power levels, the number of households suffering from DTT
receiver overload could therefore be up to 150 000 of DTT households in
Denmark.
Turning to ACI, our initial analysis using maximum EIRP at all base station sites
suggested that around 5 600 DTT households within areas of the country
receiving DTT services on Channel 60 could be affected by ACI from one LTE
network using the lowermost channels in the 800MHz band (i.e. FDD1). The
cumulative effect of ACI from two LTE networks, one using blocks FDD1/FDD2
and one using blocks FDD3/FDD4, increases the number of DTT households
affected from 5 600 to 7 600, located within areas of the country receiving DTT
services on Channel 60. The cumulative ACI is dominated by the network using
blocks FDD1/FDD2, since the increased frequency separation that exists from
blocks FDD3/FDD4 will mitigate the ACI effect.
Our more detailed analysis in Section 4 considered interference effects in more
detail and in particular took account of the effects of deploying more realistic
EIRP levels at individual LTE base station sites. This analysis focussed on two
areas of Denmark, one to the north of Copenhagen and the second around
Ringsted-Sor. By extrapolating those results nationally, our results show that
use of realistic EIRP levels at LTE base station sites can reduce the number of
households affected by interference significantly.
From our more detailed analysis, we found that ACI could affect more DTT
households than receiver overload, which contrasts with our initial analysis where
overload was thought to be the dominant issue.
Results from the more detailed analysis suggest that overload might affect
between 2 500 and 3 000 DTT households nationally (from three LTE networks).
92
We also found that up to 2 000 DTT households might be affected by ACI within
areas of the country receiving DTT services using Channel 59 (from one network
using blocks FDD1/FDD2)57.
For areas of the country using DTT Channel 60, we found that between 4 500
and 5 000 DTT households could receive ACI from an LTE network based upon
the Network A configuration in our modelling.
It should be noted that Networks B and C resulted in a higher number of affected
households (between 7 000 and 7 500) as a result of the increased coverage and
additional base stations in those networks. However, it is noted that our
nationwide extrapolation of results from the Ringsted-Sor area should be viewed
with caution, due to the specific characteristics of DTT coverage in that area,
which we believe could be responsible for a greater proportion of households
being predicted to be affected by ACI.
7.2 Conclusions on the suitability of different mitigation

techniques
Overall, and assuming realistic EIRP levels are deployed at LTE base station
sites, our results suggest that between 9 000 and 10 000 households might be at
risk of interference from LTE to DTT::
Between 2 500 and 3 000 households nationally might be at risk of

interference from receiver overload
Between 4 500 and 5 000 households might be at risk of interference from
ACI in areas of Denmark receiving DTT services using Channel 60, and
up to 2 000 households in areas using Channel 59
However, our study has also identified a number of practical means of mitigating
interference effects for these potentially affected households.
Our analysis suggests the most practical, cost-effective means of mitigation
appears to be installation of low-pass DTT receiver filters. Our estimates of the
attenuation that can be achieved by a low-pass filter for Channel 60 (based upon
information received from Braun Telecom for this study) are as follows:
from LTE FDD1 emissions, around 2dB C/I improvement

from LTE FDD2 emissions, around 5dB
from LTE FDD3 emissions, around 12dB
from FDD4 and above, more than 17dB.
Inclusion of an additional 5dB of attenuation within our modelling (relative to the

realistic model where different base stations have different EIRP levels) causes a
73% reduction in the households affected by receiver overload, and the addition
of 10dB attenuation causes an 95% reduction. For ACI, the percentage reduction
is 65% for a filter providing 5dB of attenuation and 93% for 10dB of attenuation,
for ACI within Channel 59 areas. For Channel 60 areas, we estimate that filtering
57
This is ACI to areas of the country receiving DTT using channel 59, since the area chosen for our
more detailed analysis was to the north of Copenhagen, where DTT Channel 60 is not used.
93
providing 5dB of attenuation will only provide limited (less than 47%) reduction in
households affected by ACI from FDD1, due to the limited frequency separation.
We also note that LTE base station filters could also be used in combination with
DTT receiver filters to reduce the out-of-band component of base station
interference and therefore further reduce the number of households affected by
ACI.
Other mitigation techniques can also be applied, to improve the DTT signal
strength with respect to the LTE signal strength, thereby reducing the impact of
interference. Examples include cross-polarisation and the use of on-channel
repeaters. These techniques can be considered on a case-by-case basis since
they cannot be applied throughout Denmark for various reasons, as described in
this report.
We also note that improvement to current DTT receiver design could substantially
reduce the potential for receiver overload and ACI. In particular, the measured
results of overload threshold published in ECC Report 48 suggest that it is
possible through current DTT receiver design to achieve an Oth of at least 5dBm, which will significantly improve the immunity of TV receivers to blocking
from LTE signals. Measured PR values also show a 10 dB difference between
the worst performing and the best performing receivers. Our estimate is that if all
DTT receivers had an Oth of -5dBm for example, the number of Danish
households at risk of receiver overload would reduce by 87% compared to an Oth
of -15dBm).
It is feasible that a higher Oth limit could be specified within the standards for
DTT receivers, to ensure that future models are designed with a higher threshold.
This would not reduce the risk of receiver overload in the short term since the
majority of households will already possess one or more digital receivers
designed to todays standards. It would, however, reduce the risk of interference
over the medium term, once households upgrade their receivers.
Denmark is unlikely to be able to implement such a change by itself since
manufacturers design their products with markets much larger than Denmark in
mind typically for markets the size of the EU. Therefore, in order to implement
such a higher Oth limit, Denmark would need to coordinate the proposed
changes with other countries, or indeed with the European Commission.
However, within Denmark it might also be possible to require manufacturers to
make a clear declaration at the point of sale concerning the blocking performance
of the receiver.
It is also noted that a few households within close proximity to LTE base stations
could suffer higher levels of interference than predicted in our analysis, as a
result of near-field radiation. Taking account of the households located within the
near field of antennas from more than one network (based on existing 900 MHz
base station locations), we estimate that the number of households within an LTE
antenna near field is around 500 DTT households, which is therefore an
extremely small proportion of DTT households nationally.
For the few remaining households for which no suitable means of interference
mitigation can be found, it is possible that the only solution for blocking would be
to change from DTT to an alternative platform (e.g. cable, IPTV or satellite).
Provision of targeted information to affected DTT households from LTE operators
timed with the launch of new LTE800 base stations could also be helpful in
alerting viewers to potential issues.
94
7.3 Recommendations
The following are the main recommendations from our study in relation to
licensing of the 800MHz band:
Our analysis suggests that the number of households affected by receiver
overload and ACI into DTT is substantially reduced if lower levels of EIRP
(e.g. between 45 and 50 dBm) are used at individual base stations, rather
than assuming that the maximum licensed level allowed is used at all sites.
We expect that for a number of practical reasons operators will voluntarily
deploy lower EIRP levels than the maximum licensed level at some base
station sites for example as a result of limits on the feasible size of base
station antennas at urban sites, the effects sharing of antennas with 900MHz
and associated feeder losses, use of transmit power control, etc. These
various factors mean that mobile operators will optimise their networks
individually taking account of base station locations and local traffic load.
Accordingly, we do not believe that it is necessary to stipulate a lower
licensed EIRP level within all 800MHz licences, since operators are expected
to make use of lower powers voluntarily, and imposing a lower licensed limit
could reduce operators flexibility with regard to network deployment.
However, it is noted that some additional EIRP limitations may need to be
considered on use of the lowermost LTE block within areas of the country
where DTT Channel 60 is used, given the higher proportion of potentially
affected households in those areas. It is noted that the maximum licensed
EIRP limit assumed in this report is 59dBm at most sites, or 56dBm at sites
within areas using Channel 60. There is no specified maximum in-band EIRP
limit in the ECs 800MHz decision, but the Decision suggests Member States
may set limits and, unless otherwise justified, these limits would normally lie
within the range 5664dBm (for a 5MHz channel).
Considering possible mitigation techniques to restore DTT services in the
presence of interference, filtering is the most obvious solution, although
improvements to DTT receiver specifications over time could also provide an
equally effective means of mitigating interference. Receiver filters could be
used in affected areas in Denmark without affecting either the LTE or DTT
network deployments. However, it is noted that the attenuation provided by
filters is frequency-specific, and therefore there are likely to be few
households within areas using Channel 60 for which filtering is not a practical
solution. Additionally, LTE base station filters can be used in combination with
DTT receiver filters to further improve mitigation against interference.
We have found that the effects of interference from receiver overload and ACI
can also be mitigated by the use of vertically polarised LTE antennas (in
contrast to the horizontal polarisation typically employed in DTT). However,
the practicality of this solution is limited since, although most main DTT
transmitters in Denmark use horizontal polarisation, the majority of DTT
OCRs use vertical polarisation, meaning that the cross-polarisation gain of
using vertically polarised LTE antennas cannot be realised. The use of
vertically polarised antennas might also limit the flexibility of mobile operators
to deploy LTE (given that slant antennas are in common use already, and use
of MIMO techniques is expected to become more prevalent). Therefore, we
recommend that operators are only encouraged to use vertically polarised
antennas in areas where these are feasible and are demonstrated to provide
a benefit in terms of reduced interference.
95
A further mitigation technique to improve DTT reception conditions is the

installation of DTT OCRs. In some other European countries it is normal
practice to operate OCRs on different channels to those of the main
transmitters, as a means of avoiding interference within the DTT network.
However, in Denmark OCRs typically re-broadcast using the same channel
as the main repeater, but with vertical rather than horizontal polarisation.
(This is the case because of the scarcity of broadcast channels in Denmark
as a result of cross-border coordination agreements with neighbouring
countries, which means that use of additional channels is generally not
feasible.) Therefore OCRs need to be carefully planned to avoid interference
within the DTT network. We recommend that further analysis and practical
trials be undertaken into the feasibility of using additional OCR in selected
areas in Denmark, particularly where households are located some distance
from the nearest DTT transmitter, and therefore susceptible to ACI in
particular.
In summary, we anticipate that following (voluntary) EIRP optimisation by LTE
operators and the implementation of DTT receiver filters, the number of
households still affected by blocking and/or ACI is likely to be small: up to a
few thousand households. To fully assess this number would require further
statistical (Monte Carlo-based) analysis. This would take account of the
location of households within LTE cell areas, and consider the reduction in
interference to households in the vicinity of the base station where the
interfering signal level is highest for blocking. For these households there
appears to be no further practical mitigation options for blocking, and
therefore the best solution appears to be to provide an alternative TV platform
(e.g. cable, satellite or IPTV).
96
Annex A: Blocking results
Annex A Blocking results by geo-type within Danish broadcast

regions (initial analysis)
Table A.1
Households and area affected by blocking by broadcast
region and geotype with 10dB filters [Source: Analysys Mason]
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Affected
Affected
Affected
Affected
Affected
Affected
area (%
households
area (%
households
area (%
households
of total
(% of total
of total
(% of total
of total
(% of total
area)
area)
area)
area)
area)
area)
Anholt
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.0
Laeso
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
0.7
Tolne-Nibe
1.0
1.4
0.5
1.1
0.3
1.3
Viborg
1.2
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.3
1.3
Thisted
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
1.9
Videbaek
1.5
1.2
0.6
1.8
0.2
1.1
Hadsten +
Aarhus
2.1
2.1
0.6
2.5
0.4
1.7
Hedensted
1.2
1.2
0.5
1.8
0.3
1.4
Varde
0.8
0.3
0.6
0.5
0.2
1.2
Aabenraa
0.0
0.0
0.9
1.7
0.2
1.4
Tommerup +
Svendborg
1.1
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
2.1
Koebenhavn
1.5
1.6
0.7
1.8
0.4
1.5
Vordingborg +
Nakskov
1.5
0.7
0.7
1.5
0.3
1.6
Roe
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
2.6
Jyderup
0.0
0.0
0.6
1.6
0.4
1.3
Broadcast region
Annex A : Blocking results
97
Table A.2
Households and area affected by blocking by broadcast
region and geotype with 20dB filters [Source: Analysys Mason]
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Affected
Affected
Affected
Affected
Affected
Affected
area (%
households
area (%
households
area (%
households
of total
(% of total
of total
(% of total
of total
(% of total
area)
area)
area)
area)
area)
area)
Anholt
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Laeso
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
Tolne-Nibe
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
Viborg
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
Thisted
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
Videbaek
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
Hadsten +
Aarhus
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.2
Hedensted
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.2
Varde
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
Aabenraa
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.2
Tommerup +
Svendborg
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
Koebenhavn
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.2
Vordingborg +
Nakskov
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
Roe
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.4
Jyderup
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
Broadcast region
98
Annex B : DTT site characteristics
Annex B : DTT site characteristics for Channels 60, 59 and 58

in Denmark
Table A.1
Site data for DTT Channels 60, 59 and 58 [Source: NITA]
Site Name
Channel
Longitude
Latitude
Antenna
ERP
height (m)
(dBW)
Polarisation
JYDERUP
60
11.46
55.69
311
43
KALUNDBORG
60
11.07
55.68
74
20
SKAMLEBAEK
60
11.42
55.83
78
14.8
NAKSKOV
60
11.20
54.87
159
40
VORDINGBORG
60
11.99
55.05
311
47
GLADSAXE
59
12.50
55.73
210
40
HELSINGOER
59
12.59
56.05
88
23
KOEBENHAVNVEST
59
12.24
55.72
311
47
SKODSB/LANDSKRONA
59
12.82
55.87
63
29
LYNETTEN
59
12.61
55.70
95
33
GUDHJEM
59
14.97
55.20
51
17
HAMMEREN
59
14.76
55.29
31
20
NEKSOE
59
15.13
55.08
52
26
PARADIS
59
15.11
55.09
40
17
ROE
59
14.89
55.16
309
36.5
SKIVE
59
9.05
56.57
100
17
VIBORGBY
59
9.45
56.47
97
17
VIBORG
59
9.24
56.46
309
47
LEMVIG
59
8.31
56.55
45
17
STRUER
59
8.60
56.49
62
17
VIDEBAEK
59
8.71
56.14
311
47
JYDERUP
58
11.46
55.69
311
47
KALUNDBORG
58
11.07
55.68
74
20
SKAMLEBAEK
58
11.42
55.83
78
14.8
NAKSKOV
58
11.20
54.87
159
40
VORDINGBORG
58
11.99
55.05
311
47
Annex C : Areas of interference
99
Annex C : Maps showing areas of interference (initial

analysis)
Figure C.1
Areas of interference from blocking and ACI initial analysis
100
Figure C.2
ACI from FDD1 to Channel 60 initial analysis [Source:
Analysys Mason]
101
Figure C.3
Analysys Mason]
102
Figure C.4
Analysys Mason]
Figure C.5
Mason]
103
Blocking from LTE to DTT initial analysis [Source: Analysys
104

The parameters used for the LTE link budget for 800MHz and a spectrum
allocation of 10MHz are shown in the tables below:
Table D.1
LTE link budget for downlink [Source: Analysys Mason]
Downlink
BS Transmit Power
Number of transmit antenna elements
Number of receive antenna elements
BS Antenna gain
BS Diversity Gain / MIMO Gain
BS Feeder and Connector Losses
BS EIRP
dBm
#
#
dBi
dB
dB
dBm
44.0
1.0
1.0
15.0
0.0
4.50
54.5
Mbit/s
Mbit/s
dB
8.00
8.13
4.01
Thermal Noise PSD

dBm/Hz
Number of resource blocks
#
Bandwidth per resource block
MHz
Bandwidth for the number of resource blocks MHz
Thermal Noise for required bandwidth
dBm
UE Noise Figure
dB
UE Receiver Noise Floor
dB
UE Interference margin
dB
UE Sensitivity
dB
Control channel overhead
dB
-173.98
50
0.18
9.00
-104.43
7.0
-97.4
4.0
-89.4
0.4
Data rate
Nearest performance step
Required SNR
UE Antenna Gain
UE Diversity Gain / MIMO Gain
UE Body Loss
UE Required Signal Power
Downlink Path Loss
dBi
dB
dBm
dB
0.0
0.0
0.0
-89.0
143.5
Table D.2
105
LTE link budget for uplink [Source: Analysys Mason]
Uplink
UE Transmit Power
Number of transmit antenna elements
Number of receive antenna elements
UE Antenna Gain
UE Diversity Gain / MIMO Gain
UE Body Loss
UE EIRP
dB
dBm
23.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
23.0
Mbit/s
Mbit/s
dB
2.05
5.28
1.00
Thermal Noise PSD

dBm/Hz
Number of resource blocks
#
Bandwidth per resource block
MHz
Bandwidth for the number of resource blocks MHz
Thermal Noise for required bandwidth
dBm
BS Noise Figure
dB
BS Receiver Noise Floor
dBm
BS Interference margin
dB
BS Sensitivity
dBm
Soft handover gain
dB
Fast fade margin
dB
-173.98
25
0.18
4.50
-107.44
5.0
-102.4
1.0
-100.4
0.0
0.0
Data rate
Nearest performance step
Required SNR
BS Antenna gain
BS Diversity Gain / MIMO Gain
BS Feeder and Connector Losses
BS Required Signal Power
Uplink Path Loss
dBm
#
#
dBi
dBi
dB
dB
dBm
dB
15.0
0.0
4.5
-110.9
133.9
106
Annex E : Modelling steps
Annex E : Summary of modelling steps

The first step was to imported site data for the DTT network in Denmark from the
ITU-R GE-06 agreement, as provided by NITA, into our radio planning tool.
IRT -2D
Figure E.1 Sites from ITU-R GE-06 data being imported into the radio
planning tool [Source: Analysys Mason]
We then identified sites using DTT Channels 58, 59 and 60, which is of interest
for the ACI analysis. All DTT sites are used for the blocking analysis.
107
Figure E.2
DTT sites, with those using Channels 58, 59 and 60
highlighted [Source: NITA, Analysys Mason]
The next step was to import the DTT wanted field strength maps provided by the
two Danish broadcasters into our radio planning tool. The coverage map for
MUX1 is shown in Figure below.
108
Figure E.3
Coverage maps from broadcasters imported into the radio
planning tool [Source: Analysys Mason]
A network of LTE sites was then added to the model, in line with the description
provided in the main report, using 30-metre high base stations with an assumed
Kathrein antenna pattern, from which we have identified sites falling within each
of the DTT broadcast areas of interest.
Rural
109
Suburban
Urban
Figure E.4 Illustration of theoretical LTE network [Source: Analysys Mason]

To ensure that appropriate antenna discrimination was included in our analysis,
we have performed a best server prediction within our planning tool to identify
which DTT site best serves each household. In doing so we also identified the
households within areas covered by DTT Channels 58, 59 and 60 of interest in
the ACI analysis.
110
Figure E.5 Configuring receivers to the best server [Source: Analysys

Mason]
The final stage in the modelling is to calculate the number of households covered
by the DTT network, firstly without and then with LTE ACI or blocking added. This
makes use of the KMS household data set for Denmark, using Map Info to
calculate the households located within selected areas. This household dataset
also includes summerhouses within Denmark as well as permanent residences.
111
Figure E.6
Summation of households within coverage area with
interference [Source: Analysys Mason]
For our analysis of realistic EIRP levels at individual sites, we additionally
performed a number of coverage optimisation steps to assign a unique EIRP
level at each site consistent with the calculated site separation between the site
and its nearest neighbour.
Figure E.7
Best server coverage Network A [Source: Analysys Mason]
112
Figure E.8 Best server coverage Network B [Source: Analysys Mason]
Figure E.9 Best server coverage Network C [Source: Analysys Mason]

Co-Existence of LTE Systems in 790-862mhz With DTT PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Co-Existence of LTE Systems in 790-862mhz With DTT PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

800MHz auction:

Structure of this document

Overview of approach and main assumptions

DTT coverage and frequency plan

LTE network assumptions

Analysis of LTE networks operating at maximum power levels

Effect of interference on indoor coverage of DTT

Conclusions from the initial analysis

Observations on relevance of the initial analysis to real LTE deployments

Impact of interference assuming realistic LTE deployment assumptions

Determination of individual EIRP levels

Impact of realistic EIRP levels on potential for receiver overload

Composite overload effect from three networks

Impact of using realistic EIRP levels on the potential for ACI

Impact of realistic EIRP levels on ACI in DTT Channel 60 areas

Effect on indoor coverage

Effect of site sharing between the three networks

Near-field interference effects

Evaluation of possible mitigation measures

Use of DTT receiver filters

Mitigation via additional filtering on LTE base stations

Use of cross-polarisation between LTE and DTT

Improving the DTT signal level via on-channel repeaters

Mitigation via improving DTT receiver design

Other forms of mitigation

Interference from LTE uplink emissions

Conclusions and recommendations

Summary of the main interference issues

Conclusions on the suitability of different mitigation techniques

Annex A Blocking results by geo-type within Danish broadcast regions (initial

Annex D : LTE link budget

Annex E : Summary of modelling steps

Tables & Figures

Channel plan for DTT multiplexes 1 to 6 [Source: NITA] .................. 20

DTT planning assumptions [Source: Analysys Mason] .................... 23

Correction factors applied to PR values [Source: Analysys Mason] . 25

Cell radii for LTE model [Source: Analysys Mason] ......................... 29

Table 13 Summarised results of blocking calculation from LTE to DTT, initial

Receiver overload per network [Source: Analysys Mason] .............. 47

Table 23 ACI per network Network A in blocks FDD1/FDD2 [Source:

Band plan for 470870MHz in Europe [Source: Analysys Mason] ... 11

FDD channelling arrangement for 790862MHz [Source: ECC] ...... 11

DTT directional receiving antenna [Source: ITU-R BT.419] ............. 18

Danish broadcast regions [Source: NITA]........................................ 19

Regions using Channel 60 [Source: NITA] ....................................... 21

Regions using Channel 59 [Source: NITA] ....................................... 21

Regions using Channel 58 [Source: NITA] ....................................... 22

Jaybeam antenna pattern [Source: Jaybeam, Analysys Mason] ...... 28

Selected area for analysis [Source: Analysys Mason] .................. 40

Site to geo-type matching Network A [Source: Analysys Mason]43

Site to geo-type matching Network B [Source: Analysys Mason]43

Site to geo-type matching Network C [Source: Analysys Mason]44

EIRP per site and coverage Network A [Source: Analysys Mason]

EIRP per site and coverage Network B [Source: Analysys Mason]

EIRP per site and coverage Network C [Source: Analysys Mason]

EIRP per site and coverage Network A [Source: Analysys Mason]

EIRP per site and coverage Network B [Source: Analysys Mason]

Characteristics of UHF filter [Source: Braun Telecom] ................. 80

Between 2 500 and 3 000 households nationally might be at risk of

Frequency Division Duplexing

Programme-Making and Special Events

Radio-frequency Identification: applications that exchange data between a reader and an

Band plan for 470870MHz in Europe [Source: Analysys