nabil el haddani

2010-01-13, 01:05 AM

Hi experts,
I'm working on SHO overhead optimisation on UMTS900 and UMTS2100 layers; I have a lot of cells
with excessive SHO overhead; For rural sites, i can apply more downtilt to reduce the SHO area; for
urban and dense urban sites i have the same problem but i can't downtilt because the tilt is already 8,
9 or 10, i thought about reducing the Active set size to 2 but it's not good idea cuz i will loose SHO
gain..
Can anyone light my way with some good ideas in order to optimise to the normal range which is
30%-40% and share some experience related to this task.
Br
Nabil
desi_larka

2010-01-13, 04:35 AM

Nabil
i am assuming u have the right sorts of neighbours defined. there are a few ways to acheive this
You could increase your threshold for adding which would avoid weak radio legs, you could change
hystersis which would also do similar thing. There are also priorities defined for the neighbous so you
could do that.
BTW having more than 3 RL would it give you much SHO gain anyways ? i doubt it
nabil el haddani
Thanks for your answer, i already tried that but in vain!

2010-01-13, 04:56 AM

Do u know how to implement prorities for neighbours with NSN vendor?

I know that in ZTE but NSN i should dig in
Br,
Nabil
wolverine

2010-01-13, 05:08 AM
Have you examined the possibility of reducing the power of the pilot channel (CPICH)? This is usually
the second step if downtilting doesn't work/isn't possible.
nabil el haddani

2010-01-13, 05:17 AM

It's a risky solution man :)

roamR
How high is the antenna height for urban area and dense urban implemented?
Physical changes such as lowering the antenna height also might help.

2010-01-13, 02:20 PM

gprastomo
Hi,

2010-01-13, 05:27 PM

Reducing the SHO, its better to apply to antenna downtilt for the cells which we dont want to serve, or
if you want to make it difficult SHO for specific neighbour you can apply Cell Individual Offset or EcNo
Offset for that neighbour.
br
nabil el haddani
Hi guys,

2010-01-14, 07:02 PM

I realised that mostly all U900 cells have SHO overhead higher than 50%; seems global problem.
Anyone have an idea.
Thank u guys
gprastomo

2010-01-14, 07:22 PM

Do you work on U900-2100 SHO or separately ?

nabil el haddani
I'm working on U9-U21 together, what's the effect?
fangruan2201

2010-01-14, 08:00 PM

2010-01-14, 08:09 PM

Hi experts,
I'm working on SHO overhead optimisation on UMTS900 and UMTS2100 layers; I have a lot of cells
with excessive SHO overhead; For rural sites, i can apply more downtilt to reduce the SHO area; for
urban and dense urban sites i have the same problem but i can't downtilt because the tilt is already 8,
9 or 10, i thought about reducing the Active set size to 2 but it's not good idea cuz i will loose SHO
gain..
Can anyone light my way with some good ideas in order to optimise to the normal range which is
30%-40% and share some experience related to this task.
Br
Nabil
Friend!
If the statistics u got are from OMC, I doubt it is the counter problem?
Tto confirm u can analyse the logfiles? Export the active set size statisctics then calculate the average:
Eg:
Number of Components in Active Set
Count
Percentage
1
222

444

3
111
Then the SHO overhead = (1*222 + 2*444+3*111)/(222+444+111)
~1-2 is fine!
nabil el haddani
Hi gprastomo,

2010-01-14, 08:10 PM

plz find enclosed the xls file with SHO overhead statistics for RT and NRT services, it's filtered on SHO
overh more than 50%, you can see that's it's general issue for U9 cells (like 143YEW1), but not for
U21 (with YEU naming).
You can find also ADJS for neighbours and also gsm timing advance to have an idea about the
overshooting sites in 900 band.
Thanks for ure help
@fangruan2201: i already did this exercise, it gives the same results with high SHO overhead!!
Br,
Nabil
gprastomo

2010-01-14, 08:25 PM

Hi gprastomo,
plz find enclosed the xls file with SHO overhead statistics for RT and NRT services, it's filtered on SHO
overh more than 50%, you can see that's it's general issue for U9 cells (like 143YEW1), but not for
U21 (with YEU naming).
You can find also ADJS for neighbours and also gsm timing advance to have an idea about the
overshooting sites in 900 band.
Thanks for ure help
@fangruan2201: i already did this exercise, it gives the same results with high SHO overhead!!
Br,
Nabil
Dear Friend,
based on my general analysis, it should be like this (This case almost the same with GSM and DCS
layer).
U900 will have better coverage than U2100, so the SHO OH have higher than U2100. What i want to
know is :
1. Both of them implemented on the same antenna or not ?

2. The tilt should be different between both of them

So this U900 should be treated differently, the parameter should be differ from U2100, we have to
match with the objective of implementing this U900 (is is coverage or capacity issue) both of these
issue will treated as different strategy.
br
nabil el haddani

2010-01-14, 08:33 PM

To answer your questions:

1. Both of them implemented on the same antenna or not ?
we have separated dual antenna one for GSM900/UMTS900 and second one handling DCS/U2100.
2. The tilt should be different between both of them
indeed it's different value since it's different antennas.
Here we have continuous coverage of U900 so it's for coverage issue, and on the top of this layer we
have U2100 layer for capacity issue in the hot spots and high traffic areas.
For the paramaters, we have defined different templates/objects for each layer of course.
don't hesitate to ask me more questions to have clear idea about my case.
Thanks for ure time
Br,
Nab
So this U900 should be treated differently, the parameter should be differ from U2100, we have to
match with the objective of implementing this U900 (is is coverage or capacity issue) both of these
issue will treated as different strategy
gprastomo

2010-01-14, 08:49 PM

Hi Boss,
What is the value for addition window, deletion and replacement for both band ?
br
nabil el haddani
2010-01-14, 08:56 PM
additions parameters:
-for RT :addition window: 4db ; addition time 640 ms
-for NRT: addition window : 2.5db, addition time 640ms (for HSDPA it's 100ms).
drop parameters:
-For RT: drop window :6db; addition time is 1280ms.
-For NRT: drop wiondow 4db; addition time is 1280ms(for HSDPA it's 640ms).
replacement parameters: for RT, NRT and HS
default ones : 2db as replacement window and 100ms as replacement time

Thanks
Nabil
gprastomo
2010-01-14, 10:27 PM
This parameter is quite normal.
Do you add the Cell Individual Offset to specific neighbour ?
So what we have to do is :
1. identify on which cells the SHO is taking place -> by looking to SHO per adjacencies (which
neighbour is the most illogical SHO event)
2. anlysing the pillot pollution area -> from drivetest
3. analysing the cells which has more than 2 average active set size-> from the counter
br
nabil el haddani

2010-01-14, 11:46 PM
For the EcNo offset, how to choose these specific nighbours to apply an offset on it? by looking to SHO
per adjacencies !!?
arameter is quite normal.
Do you add the Cell Individual Offset to specific neighbour ?
So what we have to do is :
1. identify on which cells the SHO is taking place -> by looking to SHO per adjacencies (which
neighbour is the most illogical SHO event)
2. anlysing the pillot pollution area -> from drivete
nabil el haddani
Sorry

2010-01-14, 11:46 PM

For the EcNo offset, how to choose these specific nighbours to apply an offset on it? by looking to SHO
per adjacencies !!?
gprastomo
Hi Boss,

2010-01-15, 01:03 AM

From the SHO adjencies report, you can generate the per neighbour performance. You can select
which neighbour which has illogical attempt (high attemp from the faraway). Then you can apply CIO
(Cell indiividual Offset in Siemens 3G), IntraFreqNcellEcNoOffset on NSN 3G. Positif value will treat the
cell as if better than the real value, negative value will act as opposite way.
johnsonsem
Hi Boss,

2011-03-21, 10:45 PM

From the SHO adjencies report, you can generate the per neighbour performance. You can select
which neighbour which has illogical attempt (high attemp from the faraway). Then you can apply CIO
(Cell indiividual Offset in Siemens 3G), IntraFreqNcellEcNoOffset on NSN 3G. Positif value will treat the
cell as if better than the real value, negative value will act as opposite way.
Good thread and learn alotz....:D
fahmi
Hi guys,

2011-04-13, 09:16 PM

I realised that mostly all U900 cells have SHO overhead higher than 50%; seems global problem.
Anyone have an idea.
Thank u guys
Hi nabil,
What's new for this problem, does it still persists ?
if not, how did you proceed ?
BR
developingrhythm

2011-04-13, 10:41 PM
Just a basic comment. U900 goes a long way and the cell coverage has to be controlled in order to
reduce SHO OH. Then what type of vertical BW do you have in your network on U900. A higher
vertical BW even with DT will increase the SHO overhead.
:)
riyantoyadi
2011-04-13, 11:07 PM
absolutelly if u900 have more SHO than u21 because of using lower frequency range the coverage
bigger than u21.
1. Clearly for rural, it's just make downtilt antenna but hardly if concentration of traffic far away from
Node B
2. For Urban/Dense you try to reduce for threshold HO and sharing coverage with the neighbour base
on Propagation Delay each cell to the neighbor
Note : to reduce problem U900 on urban/dense, please put antenna height of U21 higher than U900
that make sharing of coverage (possible using different antenna type)
adewijaya

2011-04-14, 12:48 AM

yes i think is better solution

rimoucha
Hello,

2011-05-10, 10:06 PM

Sorry but I have a question: How to determine the SHO overhead for a cell (vendor is Huawei).
Best regards,
RFDude_PMA

2011-05-11, 01:12 AM

Why do you think is a risky solution to reduce the CPICH?

How much do you have it right now?
adewijaya
2011-05-11, 01:59 AM
this activity for lazy engineer to make optimization, last choice is reduce PCPICH but please do some
tilt more better solution in case of signal penetration
fahmi

2011-05-11, 02:11 AM
this activity for lazy engineer to make optimization, last choice is reduce PCPICH but please do some
tilt more better solution in case of signal penetration
Yes, but downtilting may affect the G900 coverage. in such a case no solution but changing CPICH
:rolleyes:.
yafawi79

2011-05-11, 03:54 AM

Hi nabil
what about the SHO qual min? did u try to tune it ?

raghchau

2011-06-15, 09:01 PM

In my network, soft handover overhead is very high(58%).

Can anyone suggest means to improve this?
auto_art
In my network, soft handover overhead is very high(58%).

2011-06-15, 09:46 PM

Can anyone suggest means to improve this?

hi
check for pilot pollution
also..it not alarming if ur nw doesnt have much traffic..in new launced nw it generaly gives high values
due to less traffic
raghchau
You are right..It is newly launched network but it is increasing gradually.

2011-06-15, 10:06 PM

Initially it was 32% but in further 2 months it has increased to 58%.

Can you suggest some specific parameters to tune for this..
auto_art

2011-06-15, 10:11 PM

You are right..It is newly launched network but it is increasing gradually.

Initially it was 32% but in further 2 months it has increased to 58%.
Can you suggest some specific parameters to tune for this..
its not much alarming..wait for some let traffic to rise...first...
there are not as parameter..noly way to reduce it to tune HO.
maasricht
Which vendor please specify?

2011-06-15, 10:24 PM

raghchau

2011-06-15, 11:11 PM

It is for Huawei system..

adewijaya
In my network, soft handover overhead is very high(58%).

2011-06-15, 11:38 PM

Can anyone suggest means to improve this?

normally is 30%-40% for SHO Overhead, please consider with Time Propagation Delays on that sector
and Pillot Polution Plot review, too many SHO make system high load on signalling.
dimooon11
2011-06-15, 11:40 PM
58% is quite high ratio.
first eliminate all overshooting cells from your network - downtilt antenna, only after this you can
think about look into parameter tuning, not before
Tomas Delgado

2011-06-16, 01:58 AM
Mate try this, sometimes it works sometimes not, try with the parameter SHOqualmin and change it
from -24 to -20 and see what happens.
hesh

2011-06-16, 03:30 AM
Mate try this, sometimes it works sometimes not, try with the parameter SHOqualmin and change it
from -24 to -20 and see what happens.
Although SHOqualmin is the param you can play with and some more parameters are also there like
TRIGTIME1A ( you can increase like from 160 to 320) and FILTER COEFFICIANT can be increase (like 2
to 3)but again...this is tradeoff between SHO and Call drop...it could delay the SHO but may increase
the Call drop.
So better idea is go with Hard optimization(tilt,azimuth change)..and limit the overshooting servers.
Hope this could help.
Rodbar
2011-06-16, 05:28 AM
I think it is not the time to work with parameters. Is much better to make a physical optimization and
then proceed to parameters change. Try to check electrical and mechanical tilt and azimuths first.
Regards,
RB
raghchau
2011-06-16, 05:48 PM
As cluster & market optimizations have already been done,all the physical optimization we made. Now
we are planning to run Schema cycle to further reduce pilot pollution issues.
auto_art
2011-06-16, 06:54 PM
As cluster & market optimizations have already been done,all the physical optimization we made. Now
we are planning to run Schema cycle to further reduce pilot pollution issues.
yeaah schema is good...it surely gonna help u.

plannerguy

2011-06-21, 05:48 PM

Hi
1)Pls take the SHO report cell wise and base don same do a drive test in that cluster .
2)Do physicall optimization for site.
3)if it fails go for Parametric optimization.
4)finally go for pillot power decrease(Not recommened , but if now way then can be executed)
Regards
Plannerguy
mobilink999

2011-06-21, 05:55 PM
I will say not to go Hesh method as this is not very fruitful. Better go for cluster drive and and then
selectively reduce overlap area. It will be reflected in SHO factor. Any soft approach is bound to have
some trade off.

Drive tesing Soft Handover Overhead/Ratio Formula request ??? !!!!

Dear Experts

As I know there are many formulas for SHO overhead/Ratio that can be calculated
from drive test data,can any one provide me with this formula please????

Thanks & best regards

Khaldounh
Reply

Reply With Quote

Thanks for this post

Post Thanks2013-06-10 08:23 PM # ADS

Finetopix
Circuit advertisement
Join Date
Always

Location
Advertising world
Posts
Many

2013-06-10, 09:20 PM #2
samuraial
Member

Reputation: 93
Join Date
2010-01-13
Location
Earth
Posts
111
Re: Drive tesing Soft Handover Overhead/Ratio Formula request ??? !!!!
From someone,

For optimising the Soft Handover (SHO) usually a parameter "Soft Handover (SHO)
Overhead" is measured and tuned. This value is easy to measure. The metric, i.e.
measured value of "SHO Overhead" is tuned to a (arbitrary) specific target value.
This target value is determined based on uniform traffic distributions and provides
decent network performance for such cases. The target for the "SHO Overhead" in
the tuning is also often set to a value which is acceptable in terms of the
allowedcapacity for the backbone network, e.g. Iub links. The importance of the
"Soft Handover Overhead" metric is to make sure that the overhead in terms of the
number of connections per cell is not excessive.

Soft Handover Overhead is calculated in two ways. 1) Average Active Set Size Total
Traffic / Primary Traffic. 2) Secondary / Total Traffic
Typical Values are like
1.7 (Avg Active Set Size)

or 35% (Secondary / Total )

Hope it helps.

Regards.
Originally Posted by khaldounh
Dear Experts

As I know there are many formulas for SHO overhead/Ratio that can be calculated
from drive test data,can any one provide me with this formula please????

Thanks & best regards

Khaldounh
Still learning.....
If you find my post useful please add reputation and click on Thank You button

My default password is: HERE

Reply

Reply With Quote

Thanks for this post

Post Thanks2013-06-10, 09:59 PM #3

lamhd_bk

Senior Member

Reputation: 274
Join Date
2009-03-11
Posts
312
Re: Drive tesing Soft Handover Overhead/Ratio Formula request ??? !!!!
we know that SHO Overhead is a ration of resource consumption. This is formular of
Nemo
(As_size_1_count + As_size_2_count*2 + As_size_3_count *3)/((As_size_1_count +
As_size_2_count + As_size_3_count) -1)*100

RGs
email: lamhdbk@gmail.com
Reply

Reply With Quote

Thanks for this post

Post Thanks khaldounh thanked for this post 2013-06-11, 03:05 PM #4

khaldounh
Member

Reputation: 46
Join Date
2012-03-20
Location
Dubai - Abu dhabi
Posts
70

Re: Drive tesing Soft Handover Overhead/Ratio Formula request ??? !!!!
Originally Posted by lamhd_bk
we know that SHO Overhead is a ration of resource consumption. This is formular of
Nemo
(As_size_1_count + As_size_2_count*2 + As_size_3_count *3)/((As_size_1_count +
As_size_2_count + As_size_3_count) -1)*100

RGs
Bro I'm getting value equal to 110% by using this formula, please advice

br

Khaldounh
Reply

Reply With Quote

Thanks for this post

Post Thanks2013-06-11, 03:09 PM #5

lamhd_bk
Senior Member

Reputation: 274
Join Date
2009-03-11
Posts
312
Re: Drive tesing Soft Handover Overhead/Ratio Formula request ??? !!!!
Originally Posted by khaldounh
Bro I'm getting value equal to 110% by using this formula, please advice

br

Khaldounh
Sr, this is formular
((As_size_1_count + As_size_2_count*2 + As_size_3_count *3)/(As_size_1_count +
As_size_2_count + As_size_3_count) -1)*100
email: lamhdbk@gmail.com
Reply

Reply With Quote

Thanks for this post

Post Thanks2013-06-11, 03:38 PM #6

samuraial
Member

Reputation: 93
Join Date
2010-01-13
Location
Earth
Posts
111
Re: Drive tesing Soft Handover Overhead/Ratio Formula request ??? !!!!
Check this material friend,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/46265448/S...dover-in-WCDMA

Regards.
Still learning.....
If you find my post useful please add reputation and click on Thank You button

My default password is: HERE

Reply

Reply With Quote

Thanks for this post

Post Thanks khurrambilal01 thanked for this post 2013-06-11, 04:08 PM #7

khaldounh
Member

Reputation: 46
Join Date
2012-03-20
Location
Dubai - Abu dhabi
Posts
70
Re: Drive tesing Soft Handover Overhead/Ratio Formula request ??? !!!!
Originally Posted by lamhd_bk
we know that SHO Overhead is a ration of resource consumption. This is formular of
Nemo
(As_size_1_count + As_size_2_count*2 + As_size_3_count *3)/((As_size_1_count +
As_size_2_count + As_size_3_count) -1)*100

RGs
Thank you very much, it was my fault, I got correct result

Br

Khaldoun

Re: Sector splitting

Originally Posted by romagdinio

Sector splitting is to add new sector to the site with the same SC of other sector in
the same site (by adding a splitter to split the power between the two antennas of
the sector). the splitting is useful to solve coverage problems as it is similar to
adding a new sector.
While the above explanation is undoubtedly correct and accurate, in many cases
people would use the term "Sector Splitting" in the place of "Cell Splitting", in which
case it gets an entirely different meaning: it means that we split an
existing sector on a given carrier, say currently with a 90- or 105-degree antenna,
into two sectors, each with 45- or 60-degree antenna. This, naturally means that
the two sectors are two separate cells with different PSC. The advantage gained is
that using a narrower-beam antenna reduces the extra-cell interference and thus
immediately increases the pole capacity in the uplink (Why? Because the narrower
the antenna beam, the smaller portion of the horizon it covers and thus the smaller
part of total available interference is received.) Using a narrowerbeam antenna means that it will have higher gain, which immediately increases the
power-limited capacity in the downlink (Why? Because with higher antennagain the
same TX power will result in higher RSCP and possibly even higher Ec/Io and Eb/No
when the interference in Io and No is mainly extra-cell; this may require adding
downtilt to prevent increasing the interference generated by the sectors in question
to their neighbours).
Currently both in US and Europe the sector-splitting is one of the items on the
operators menu, mainly done by using antennas, which integrate two 45-degree
antennas into one box. The two antennas inside the box have azimuths of -23.5
and +23.5 degrees relative to the direction in which the box faces. Thus an existing
3-sector site is converted into a 6-sector site simply by replacing the
existing antennaboxes and pulling up the tower a second set of feeders (the wind
load of the tower remains almost the same, it looks like a 3-sector tower from
outside, but has twice the number of feeders). The same approach works well when
the site is on a building, but care is taken to avoid the two beams of the
integrated antenna box to be deformed by being at a too close angle to the walls of
the building.
There are advantages to be had when the antennas are not integrated into a single
box, such as applying independent mechanical tilt. In cities, like those typical for US
(think of Seattle, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Atlanta or any city with
skyscrapers) splitting sectors and using 6-sector sites allows to choose
the sector azimuths and downtilts in such a way as to avoid specular reflections
from skyscrapers (Why? Because with three 90-degree antennas on a site it may be
difficult to choose the azimuths in such a way as to not point one of them to a
nearby skyscraper, and reflections will be unavoidable. But with with six 45-degree
antennas we can choose the azimuths in a such a way as to point only one of them
to the nearby skyscraper and downtilt it significantly, or even reduce the CPICH
power significantly for that sector.) For Europe this is less of a problem, since
skyscrapers are relatively fewer, limited mainly to Docklands in London, La Defence
in Paris, some newly-developed areas of Madrid, and such. So there the main

motivation for sector-splitting is improved capacity and coverage in historic cities,

where building new sites is very expensive due to conservation laws.
Resistor