Design and Performance Analysis of Bandwidth and
QoS Aware LTE Uplink Scheduler in Heterogeneous
Traffic Environment
Safdar N. K. Marwat, Yasir Zaki, Carmelita Goerg
Communication Networks
University of Bremen
Bremen, Germany
{safdar, yzaki, cg}@comnets.uni-bremen.de
AbstractLong Term Evolution (LTE) uses Single Carrier
Frequency Division Multiple Access (SC-FDMA) as the uplink
transmission scheme. The Quality of Service (QoS) provision is
one of the primary objectives of the wireless network operators.
In this paper, the end-to-end QoS performance of Bandwidth and
QoS Aware (BQA) scheduler for LTE uplink is evaluated in
heterogeneous traffic environment. The BQA scheduler is
designed to provide efficient allocation of radio resources to users
according to the QoS requirements of various traffic classes and
the instantaneous channel conditions. The user QoS provision is
ensured by using dynamic QoS weights. Additionally, the delay
sensitive traffic is facilitated by employing delay thresholds. The
BQA scheduler algorithm supports multi-bearer users. The end-
to-end QoS performance of the scheduler is analyzed in several
simulation scenarios. The results show that the proposed
scheduler guarantees provision of QoS to users.
Keywords-component; SC-FDMA; uplink; scheduling;
bandwidth; QoS
I. INTRODUCTION
Long Term Evolution (LTE) standard is currently being
developed by the Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP)
with targets of increasing peak user throughput, enhancing
spectral efficiency and reducing latency [1]. LTE uses
Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA)
and Single Carrier Frequency Division Multiple Access (SC-
FDMA) as the transmission schemes for the downlink and the
uplink, respectively. These schemes can effectively utilize
scare radio resources by dividing the transmission bandwidth
into subcarriers, enhance the resource allocation flexibility and
achieve high spectral efficiency. In uplink, the low Peak-to-
Average Power Ratio (PAPR) of SC-FDMA signals is utilized
to achieve low battery power consumption of User Equipment
(UE). SC-FDMA also provides bandwidth allocation
flexibility.
Designing a packet scheduler requires tackling of various
conflicting requirements such as channel conditions, fairness,
Quality of Service (QoS) requirements etc. A major SC-
FDMA constraint in LTE uplink is that the subcarriers
allocated to a single UE should to be adjacent to each other.
The UE transmit power in uplink is adapted according to
978-1-4577-1379-8/12/$26.00 2012 IEEE
Thushara Weerawardane, Andreas Timm-Giel
Communication Networks
Hamburg University of Technology
Hamburg, Germany
{thushara.weerawardane, timm-giel}@tuhh.de
Power Control (PC) to adjust the maximum Physical Resource
Blocks (PRBs) allocable to a UE within a Transmission Time
Interval (TTI). The uplink scheduler is expected to be aware of
the PC functionality. The scheduler should also be able to
serve multi-bearer UEs and fulfill QoS requirements of each
traffic type. The resources should be allocated to UEs
proportional to data in the UE buffers.
II. STATE OF THE ART
LTE packet scheduling algorithms available in literature
mostly focus on downlink scheduling (e.g. [2,3] and others).
The work related to uplink scheduling rarely addresses the QoS
provision to multiclass traffic. Seldom have the QoS based
uplink scheduling algorithms been designed to support multi-
traffic type users; to our knowledge, none has discussed this
issue.
In the scheduling schemes in [4,5], the QoS requirements of
users in heterogeneous traffic environment are fulfilled by
employing target data rate based metric for each traffic class. In
[6,7], the traffic classes are served by utilizing target delay rate
based metric. In [8,9], the traffic classes are served on the basis
of target data loss rate. These scheduling algorithms have been
designed for downlink. For uplink, the contiguity constraint of
PRBs in heterogeneous traffic, with multi-traffic type users
make these designs impracticable.
In [10], a scheduling scheme to ensure QoS provision to
VoIP users with fairness has been designed. In [11], the target
delay based scheduling algorithm for QoS provision to multi-
class traffic has been extended from downlink to uplink by
introducing a factor of power control to scheduling metric.
However, the negligence of the PRB contiguity constraint
means that this algorithm may not be practically feasible for
wireless SC-FDMA systems. In [12,13], the contiguity
constraint issue has been addressed and the scheduling metric
is based on target data rate for various QoS classes. However,
these algorithms support only single-bearer UEs, so the
resource requests can be treated independently of each other
and PRBs can be allocated from any portion of the bandwidth.
If the multi-bearer UEs are present in the system, the resource
requests having different QoS requirements within a single UE
499
cannot be treated independently and the PRBs allocated to Moving Average (EMA) time window of 1s, Wi ,k (t ) is the
these requests should be contiguous. In [14], the uplink dynamic QoS weight of the bearer k of UE i at time t and
scheduling scheme is based on a combination of target data rate expressed as:
based and target delay based metric. The scheme is evaluated
Rmin,k i ,k (t )
in two resource distribution algorithms. The performance of the Wi ,k (t ) = . . k (t )
R (t ) (2)
algorithms is compared with simulation results. However in avg .i.k max,k
this scheme also, each UE is considered to have only single
QoS class traffic. This algorithm may not be beneficial in case Where, Rmin,k is the bit rate budget (target data rate) and
of multi-bearer UEs in the system. max,k is the end-to-end delay budget (target delay) of QoS
III. BQA SCHEDULER DESIGN class k, Ravg .i.k (t ) is the average throughput and i , k (t ) is the
This paper evaluates the QoS provision of Bandwidth and average delay of bearer k of UE i, k (t ) is a variable with
QoS Aware (BQA) LTE uplink scheduler proposed in [15]. value set to 10 if i , k (t ) is above the threshold value of bearer
The scheduler is designed to cover most of the features of SC-
k at time t, otherwise equal to 1. For various QoS classes, a list
FDMA based LTE uplink in its functionalities and incorporate
of bit rate budget, packet delay budget and delay threshold
the available research work on the topic. The BQA scheduling
values is given in TABLE I. Bit rate budget for QoS classes is
algorithm is designed to support multiple QoS traffic type UEs.
defined according to their traffic models. These values can be
The scheduling is performed in two main phases i.e. the Time
tuned to modify the behavior of the scheduler.
Domain Packet Scheduling (TDPS) and the Frequency Domain
Packet Scheduling (FDPS). The presence of data packets in the B. Scheduling in Frequency Domain
buffer of the UE is reported to the eNodeB using Buffer Status In FDPS, a certain number of high priority UEs are selected
Reports (BSRs). The channel conditions of the active users for allocation of frequency resources within the TTI. The
(having pending uplink data) are acquired using Channel State bandwidth is divided into portions called Resource Chunks
Information (CSI) which is carried by Sounding Reference (RCs) as in Figure 1. The RCs are allocated to the chosen UEs
Signals (SRS). In this work, it is assumed that the SRS are based on FDPS metric values for each RC of each UE. The
received at the eNodeB at each TTI and for all the PRBs of FDPS metric values are generated with Proportional Fair
active users. Moreover, it is also assumed that eNodeB is Scheduled QoS-aware (PFSchedQ) algorithm and expressed
aware of the Power Spectral Density (PSD) of each active UE as:
using power headroom reports. The transmit power of a UE is R (t )
tuned by FPC scheme based on PC, which determines the
maximum number of PRBs that a UE is allowed to utilize for
i ,c (t ) = inst ,i ,c
R sch,avg ,i (t ). Wi ,k (t )
k
(3)
transmission. The bearers of UE with multiple QoS traffic
types are scheduled according to their QoS requirements and Where i ,c (t ) is the FDPS metric value for PRB c of UE i,
bearer starvation is avoided. The QoS performance of BQA Rinst ,i ,c (t ) is the instantaneously achievable throughput for
scheduler is analyzed by simulating several scenarios. The
PRB c of UE i, Rsch,avg ,i (t ) is the average throughput of UE i
results of the simulations performed are illustrated with the
help of graphs in this paper. over only those TTIs where i successfully enters the FDPS.
A. Scheduling in Time Domain TABLE I. BIT RATE BUDGET, DELAY BUDGET AND DELAY THRESHOLD
The TDPS phase is designed to assign priorities to
Traffic Bit rate budget Packet end-to-end Packet delay
scheduling candidate UEs for a particular TTI in a given cell. A Type (kbps) delay budget (ms) threshold (ms)
candidate gets high metric value if it has stringent QoS
requirements, better channel conditions and/or has been unable VoIP 55 0.1 0.02
to obtain any significant resources in the recent past TTIs Video 132 0.3 0.1
(fairness). The TDPS metric values are generated for each
active UE by 'weighted Proportional Fair' (wPF) algorithm. HTTP 120 0.3 --
The TDPS metric value for UE i is formulated as: FTP 10 0.3 --
R (t , ni )
i (t ) = inst ,i
Ravg ,i

k
Wi ,k (t ) (1) 1) RC Allocation Algorithm: The allocation of RCs is
achieved by a search-tree based algorithm named as Fixed
Where i (t ) is the TDPS metric value for UE i, Size Chunk and Flexible Bandwidth (FSCFB) algorithm. The
Rinst ,i (t , ni ) is the instantaneously achievable throughput of FSCFB allocates RCs according to the RC combination
yielding the best accumulative FDPS metric value; i.e. best in
UE i having maximum allowed number of PRBs ni (set
terms of RC metric value (sum of PRB metric values within the
according to power control), Ravg ,i (t ) is the average RC). The combinations not following contiguity, buffer size,
throughput of UE i at time t determined by using Exponential and maximum allowed RCs constraints are discarded. The
algorithm steps are summarized as follows:

500
 1) Make a UE-RC table as in Figure 2. Each table element
would be the RC metric value of the UE, i.e. the sum of
PRB metric values within that RC.
2) Make all possible combinations of UE-RC allocation
using search-tree algorithm (explained below) while
respecting the contiguity, buffer size and maximum
allowed bandwidth constraints; determine the resulting
global metric value for each combination as in Figure
3.
3) Choose the combination with best global metric value.
4) Obtain the desired resource allocation from best
combination.
Step 2 is based on a search-tree based resource allocation
algorithm termed as unique Depth-First Search (uDFS)
algorithm with contiguity, buffer size and maximum allowed
bandwidth constraints. The uDFS checks all possible
combinations of RC allocation and discards the combinations
which do not follow the constraints; further depth of such
nodes is not explored. An example of uDFS tree is given in
Figure 3. It is assumed that at most, 2 RCs can be allocated to
a UE. Blue nodes breach contiguity constraint and red nodes
breach maximum PRBs constraint.
2) Multi-Bearer User Scheduling: If the multi-bearer users
acquire RCs, the allocated PRBs are further subdivided among
the user bearers. Each user bearer has its own QoS
requirements related to delay budget, rate budget and delay
threshold. The user bearers require adequate resources to
ensure QoS provision and avoid bearer starvation. In this
work, the bearers get weighted service, i.e. a bearer is
served according to its QoS weight Wi ,k (t ) . However, the
bearers having reached their packet delay threshold are given
strict priority and the available resources are allocated to them
before serving other bearers.
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
The QoS performance of BQA scheduler is analyzed with
several simulation scenarios. The scheduler performance is
compared with other contemporary schedulers in [15,16]. Due
to the multi-bearer UE scheduling capability of the BQA
scheduler; it seems probable that the QoS provision feature of
the scheduler in TDPS might prioritize a low priority bearer of
UE1 due to the presence of high priority bearer of UE1, over
the same type of bearer of UE2 without presence of high
priority bearer in UE2. Similarly, as compared to a high
priority single-bearer UE3; it might be expected that a high
priority bearer may not be served according to its QoS in a
UE4 having a low priority bearer as well. The goal of these
simulations is to determine if the provision of QoS to UEs is
consistent, in various traffic scenarios.
Figure 1. Chunk size 3 of M RCs and bandwidth of N PRBs
501
RC0 RC1 RC2
UE0 10 6 3
UE1 11 10 5
Figure 2. A sample UE-RC table for two UEs and three RCs
Figure 3. uDFS for two UEs and three RCs
The parameter settings used during the simulations are
given in TABLE II. In each scenario, UEs with different
bearers are studied. In order to keep the environment loaded, 8
FTP single-bearer UEs per cell are deployed additionally to the
UEs under study in all scenarios.
1) Scenario 1 (FTP): This scenario depicts a case where 9
UEs are under study (along with 8 FTP UEs deployed for
loading the environment). Among the UEs under study, 3 UEs
have only FTP data; 3 UEs have FTP and VoIP data; while 3
UEs have FTP and video data. The goal of this scenario is to
check whether the FTP bearer of each UE is served
consistently and fairly, with or without the presence of other
bearers, i.e. VoIP and video.
Results of this simulation are depicted in Figure 4. Results
show that the provision of QoS to UEs with FTP data is
consistent over all the UEs. The reason for slightly higher
response times of FTP-video UEs as compared to other UEs is
the higher data rate requirement of video traffic. The
Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) of the average FTP
file upload time for all the UEs in the cell is shown in Figure 5.
2) Scenario 2 (VoIP): This scenario illustrates a case
where 9 UEs are simulated such that 3 UEs have only VoIP
data; 3 UEs have VoIP and FTP data; while 3 UEs have VoIP
and HTTP data. This scenario investigates whether the delay
requirements of the VoIP bearer of each UE are served
consistently and fairly with or without the presence of other
bearers. VoIP is a delay sensitive bearer and the presence of
other bearers within a UE should not hinder the QoS provision
to VoIP.
Results of this simulation are depicted in Figure 6. Results
show that the provision of QoS to UEs with VoIP data is not
affected by presence of other bearers in a UE. The range of
average UE packet end-to-end delays is between 0.069 and
0.074sec and depicted as CDF in Figure 7.

TABLE II. MAIN SIMULATION PARAMETERS

Parameter Setting
Cell layout 1 eNodeB, 3 cells
System Bandwidth 5 MHz (~25 PRBs)
Frequency reuse factor 1
Cell radius 375m
UE velocity 120kmph
Max UE power 23dBm
Path loss 128.1+37.6log10(R), R in km
Log-normal shadowing, 8dB standard
Slow fading
deviation, correlation 1 Figure 4. FTP average file upload time for 9 different UEs
Fast fading Jakes-like method [17]
Mobility Model Random Way Point (RWP)
UE buffer size Infinite
Power Control FPC, = 0.6, P0 = -58dBm
Traffic environment Loaded
Max FDPS UEs 5
RC size 5
VoIP traffic model
Silence/ talk spurt length Exponential(3) sec
Encoder scheme GSM EFR
Video traffic model
Frame size 1200 bytes
Frame inter-arrival time 75ms
Figure 5. CDF of FTP average cell file upload time [sec]
HTTP traffic model
Page size 100Kbytes
Page inter-arrival time 12 sec
FTP traffic model
File size 20Mbytes
File inter-request time Uniform distribution, min 80s, max 100s
3) Scenario 3 (video): Another case is illustrated in
scenario 3 with 9 UEs being simulated. 3 UEs have only video
data to transmit; 3 UEs have video and FTP data; while 3 UEs
have video and VoIP data. This scenario aims to determine
whether the delay requirements of video bearer of each UE are
served consistently and fairly irrespective of the presence of
other bearers. The presence of other bearers should not hinder
the QoS provision to video bearer of UEs.
Figure 6. VoIP average packet end-to-end delay for 9 different UEs
Results of this simulation are depicted in Figure 8. Results
of this scenario also confirm the provision of QoS to UEs with
video data. It is shown that the video data rate is not adversely
affected by presence of other bearers within a UE. The average
UE packet delay time for all UEs is similar to each other. It
ranges between 0.034sec and 0.036sec as in Figure 9.
4) Scenario 4 (HTTP): Another case for 9 UEs is
illustrated in this scenario. 3 UEs have only HTTP data to
transmit; 3 UEs have HTTP and video data; while 3 UEs have
HTTP and VoIP data. This scenario aims to determine whether
the HTTP page response time offered by the scheduler to
HTTP bearer of each UE is consistent and fair irrespective of
the presence of other bearers. The goal is to ensure QoS
provision to HTTP bearer of all UEs. Figure 7. CDF of VoIP average cell packet end-to-end delay [sec]

502

Figure 8. Video average packet end-to-end delay for 9 different UEs
Figure 9. CDF of video cell packet end-to-end delay [sec]
Figure 10. HTTP average page response time for 9 different UEs
Figure 11. CDF of HTTP cell page response time [sec]
503
Results of this simulation are depicted in Figure 10. The
graphs illustrate the fair provision of QoS to UEs with HTTP
data in this scenario. The presence of other bearers within a UE
does not hinder HTTP page response for the UEs. The average
UE page response time for all UEs is within the range of
0.666sec and 0.806sec as given in Figure 11.
5) Scenario 5 (FTP, VoIP and video): This scenario
inspects the performance of the scheduler by checking QoS
provision to 3 different bearers. In this case, 9 single-bearer
UEs and 6 multi-bearer UEs are simulated. The single-bearer
UEs include 3 VoIP, 3 video and 3 FTP UEs. Among the
multi-bearer UEs, 3 UEs have VoIP and FTP traffic, while 3
have video and FTP traffic for uplink. The purpose of this
scenario is to determine the QoS facilitation capability of the
scheduler to different traffic type UEs simultaneously in
heterogeneous traffic environment.
The simulation results are depicted in Figure 12. to Figure
14. The FTP, VoIP and video QoS performance of the
scheduler is shown to be acceptable. The low and high priority
bearers are served fairly in single and multi-bearer UEs.
V. CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK
In this paper, the QoS performance of the BQA scheduler is
evaluated in heterogeneous traffic environment. The QoS
requirements of multi-bearer UEs are efficiently fulfilled by the
scheduler using dynamic QoS weights. The scheduler is time
and frequency domain decoupled. The resource allocation is
performed by exploiting the bandwidth flexibility feature of
SC-FDMA. The contiguity constraint of subcarriers is also
tackled by the scheduler design. UE buffer size plays a role in
acquiring resources. Simulation results confirm that the
scheduler performs consistently and fairly to guarantee QoS
demands of the various types of UE bearers. In future, the
scheduler design can be further enhanced by implementing the
Admission Control (AC) functionality.
Figure 12. FTP average file upload time for 9 different UEs

Figure 13. VoIP average packet end-to-end delay for 9 different UEs
Figure 14. Video average packet end-to-end delay for 9 different UEs
REFERENCES
[1] H. Holma and A. Toskala, LTE for UMTS OFDMA and SC-FDMA
Based Radio Access, Illustrated ed. The Atrium, Southern Gate,
Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United Kingdom: John Wiley &
Sons Ltd, 2009.
[2] Liljana Gavrilovska and Dejan Talevski, "Novel Scheduling Algorithms
for LTE Downlink Transmission," in 19th Telecommunications Forum,
22-24 Nov. 2011, pp. 398 - 401.
[3] Dandan Wang, R. Soni, Pichun Chen, and A. Rao, "Video Telephony
over Downlink LTE Systems with/without QoS Provisioning," in 34th
IEEE Sarnoff Symposium, 3-4 May 2011, pp. 1 - 5.
[4] G. Monghal, K. I. Pedersen, I. Z. Kovcs, and P. E. Mogensen, "QoS
Oriented Time and Frequency Domain Packet Scheduler for the UTRAN
Long Term Evolution," in IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference,
Spring 2008, 11-14 May 2008, pp. 2532 - 2536.
[5] D. Laselva et al., "On the Impact of Realistic Control Channel
Constraints on QoS Provisioning in UTRAN LTE," in IEEE 70th
504
Vehicular Technology Conference, 20-23 Sept. 2009, pp. 1 - 5.
[6] M. Assaad, "Frequency-Time Scheduling for Streaming Services in
OFDMA Systems," in 1st IFIP Wireless Days, 24-27 Nov. 2008, pp. 1 -
5.
[7] G. Piro, L. A. Grieco, G. Boggia, and P. Camarda, "A Two-level
Scheduling Algorithm for QoS Support in the Downlink of LTE Cellular
Networks," in European Wireless Conference, 12-15 April 2010, pp. 246
- 253.
[8] Yunzhi Qian, Canjun Ren, Suwen Tang, and Ming Chen, "Multi-Service
QoS Guaranteed Based Downlink Cross-Layer Resource Block
Allocation Algorithm in LTE Systems," in International Conference on
Wireless Communications & Signal Processing, 13-15 Nov. 2009, pp. 1 -
4.
[9] Chong Lou and Ling Qiu, "QoS-Aware Scheduling and Resource
Allocation for Video Streams in e-MBMS Towards LTE-A System," in
IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, 5-8 Sept. 2011, pp. 1 - 5.
[10] Zhijie Wang, Yafeng Wang, Dajie Jiang, Chunchang Tian, and Dacheng
Yang, "Scheduling and Link Adaptations for VoIP in TDD-LTE Uplink,"
in 5th International Conference on Wireless Communications,
Networking and Mobile Computing, 24-26 Sept. 2009, pp. 1 - 5.
[11] Hung Pham, Xuan Nhan Vu, and Seung-Hoon Hwang, "Service Class-
aided Scheduling for LTE," in 13th International Conference on
Advanced Communication Technology, 13-16 Feb. 2011, pp. 39 - 43.
[12] M. Anas, C. Rosa, F. D. Calabrese, K. I. Pedersen, and P. E. Mogensen,
"Combined Admission Control and Scheduling for QoS Differentiation
in LTE Uplink," in IEEE 68th Vehicular Technology Conference, 21-24
Sept. 2008, pp. 1 - 5.
[13] F. Ghandour, M. Frikha, and S. Tabbane, "A Fair and Power Saving
Uplink Scheduling Scheme for 3GPP LTE Systems ," in International
Conference on the Network of the Future, 28-30 Nov. 2011, pp. 6 - 9.
[14] O. Delgado and B. Jaumard, "Scheduling and Resource Allocation for
Multiclass Services in LTE Uplink Systems," in IEEE 6th International
Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and
Communications, 11-13 Oct. 2010, pp. 355 - 360.
[15] S. N. K. Marwat, T. Weerawardane, Y. Zaki, C. Goerg, and A. Timm-
Giel, "Performance Evaluation of Bandwidth and QoS Aware LTE
Uplink Scheduler," in 10th International Conference on Wired/Wireless
Internet Communications, Santorini, Greece, 6-8 June, 2012, in press.
[16] S. N. K. Marwat, T. Weerawardane, Y. Zaki, C. Goerg, and A. Timm-
Giel, "Performance of Bandwidth and QoS Aware LTE Uplink Scheduler
Towards Delay Sensitive Traffic," in 17. ITG Fachtagung
Mobilkommunikation, Osnabrueck, Germany, 9-10 May, 2012, in press.
[17] J. K. Cavers, Mobile Channel Characteristics.: Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 2002.