IEEE 802.

11p Vehicle to Vehicle (V2V) Communication

Charles Joseph OGALA CIU Research Group Cyprus International University January 12, 2012

Agenda

What Well Cover Today!!!

1. Introduction 2. Evolution of 802.11p Technology

3. Vehicular communication at a Glance and Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments(WAVE) 4. Modeling Agilents Advanced Design Systems (ADS) According to IEEE 802.11p for the vehicular environment. 5. Simulated Results for Fading Channel

Executive Summary
The Concept
The Opportunity Motivation
vehicle-tovehicle (V2V).
Smart Cars Safer roads Less traffic Fading

Introduction
In 2009 the American Federal communication

commission (FCC) dedicated 75 MHz band width of 5.850-5.925 GHz for V2V wireless communication. The vehicular band is located right above Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-NII) radio band. In 2004 a task group under IEEE and OSI committee developed an initiative that will enhance common Physical (PHY) for Vehicle to Vehicle (V2V) and Vehicle to Infrastructure (V2I) communication at 5.9 GHz.

Summaries of the IEEE 802.11 Standard

Years 1997 1999 1999 2003
2007

Standards 802.11 -97 802.11a 802.11b 802.11g

802.11n

Speed 1Mbps 2 Mbps Up to 54 mbps 5.5Mbps 11Mbps 54Mbps 108Mbps

100 Mbps

Frequency Band 2.4 GHz band 5 GHz band 2.4 GHz band 2.4 GHz band
2.4 GHz band

Figure1: WLAN block diagram for IEEE 802.11p scenarios

Why Orthogonal Frequency division Multiplexing (OFDM)

In single carrier the information are represented inform of a bits called symbol. It has a disadvantage of transmitting tiny symbol with large amount of bandwidth making it an inefficient frequency carrier. symbol are also venerable to signal reflection, impulse noise and other impairments

In Frequency Division multiplexing (FDM), the whole data rate sent is divided between the various subcarriers. However, in this case interference only affects one of the frequency subbands, while the others are unaffected.

IEEE 802.11p OFDM block diagram

Physical layer Implementation Comparison of IEEE 802.11a and IEEE 802.11p.

WAVE (Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments)

The standard consists of four sub standards which are stated below
IEEE 1609.1 IEEE 1609.2 IEEE 1609.3 IEEE 1609.4

DSRC Channel Allocation

Vehicular Propagation Channels

Path loss Signal Fading

Rician Fading Distribution

Rayleigh Fading Distribution

Simulation model of IEEE 802.11p base Agilents Advanced Design Systems (ADS)

ADS Transmitter block diagram model

Transmitter Component
WLAN Data

The PPDU is generated at the WLAN Data; the frame format consists of 16 bits. The first 6 bits (0 to 6) is set to zero, these bits are used for synchronizing the descrambler at the receiver. The remaining bits (7 to 15) reserved for future use. The PPDU tail bit field comprises of 6 bits of 0, which is used to return the convolutional encoder to the zero state.
Scrambler

 Encoder

Scrambled data is transferred to the convolutional encoder by using linear shift registers. Some redundancy bit stream is introduced in a controlled way. Its main aim is to correct errors in coding which enables the receiver to combat the impairments of the channel and, hence, achieve reliable communication.
Data interleaving

 Modulation & mapping

Preamble

IEEE 802.11p PLCP field is composed of four parts: short preamble, long preamble, signal and data fields.

 IFFT and FFT

Multiplexing process of OFDM Frames

The logical subcarrier numbers are then mapped into frequency offset index -26 to 26, while skipping subcarriers -21, -7, 0, 7 and 21. After that, the assembler block enables the pilot subcarriers to be inserted into the positions of -21, -7, 7 and 21
Error Vector Magnitude

Channel Model
Environment & Power Classes 802.11p

Vehicular Antenna & Properties

 Base Station Antenna

In this research, a base station antennas of EIA/TIA-329-B, specification is used

Vehicular Antenna
A mobile antenna of "EIA/TIA-329-B-1 specification is used in this vehicular research.

Receiver Side

 Frequency Domain Equalizer

When receiver realizes a distortion, an equalizer combats the distortion introduced by the channel.

OFDM symbol de-multiplexer

This section enables the OFDM symbol to be de-multiplexed (e.g. BPSK, QPSK, and 16-QAM modulation) into data and pilot forms. The complex signal is converted to data and pilots .

 Demodulator Bank (De-mapping)

Evaluation of the reliability modules

Performance on a Typical Urban Fading Channel

 Above is a simulated result BER against SNR for LOS in a typical urban area BPSK has a BER of 2.954E-5 at 4.750. QPSK has a low BER of 4.844E-4 at 4.750 and while 16 QAM has BER of 0.004 at 4.750. From the above result BPSK has the lowest BER against SNR

802.11p BER In A Typical Urban Area For NLOS Fading Channel 6E-1 1E-1 1E-2

BER

1E-3 1E-4
BPSK 3/4

1E-5 1E-6 -2

QPSK 3/4 16 QAM 1/2

-1

Eb/No (dB)
In the case of NLOS the result indicated that BPSK has a low BER of 1.018E-4 at 4.429. QPSK has a BER of 0.001 at 4.429. And for the 16 QAM it has a low BER of 0.006 at 4.429 .
The performance of Figure 13 result is observed to degrade as a result of multi path component and non line of sight between the transmitter and the receiver. In addition the result indicates that the environment is associated with a lot building and Doppler spread that hinder the effective transmission of signal along the channel

Performance on Free space

802.11p BER In A Free Space For LOS Fading Channel

5E-1 1E-1

BER

1E-3

1E-5
BPSK 3/4 QPSK 3/4

1E-7 -2 -1

16 QAM 1/2

10

Eb/No(dB)
The figure 5.7 is a representation of LOS result for BER against SNR indicate 0.492 at -2.000 for BPSK and 9.766E-7 at 7.000, the QPSK the result indicate 0.488 at -2.000 for the starting point and 1.733E-5 at 7.000 for the ending point. And for the 16 QAM it has a starting point of 0.480 at -2.000 with an ending point of 1.074E-5 at 10.000.

802.11p BER In A Free Space For NLOS Fading Channel

5E-1 1E-1 1E-2

BER

1E-3 1E-4 1E-5 1E-6 -2 -1 BPSK 3/4 QPSK 3/4 16QAM 1/2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Eb/No(dB)
The result above states that BPSK has a BER of 1.416E-5 at 6.250 but it is also glaring that QPSK and 16 QAM are almost the same indicating that it not a good choice to use QPSK . However, the result indicates the Figure 5.7 result has the lowest BER compare to figure 5.8. Due to LOS that exist between the two car antennas

THANK YOU !

Questions