11.07.2015 Views

Multi-Carrier and Spread Spectrum Systems: From OFDM and MC ...

Multi-Carrier and Spread Spectrum Systems: From OFDM and MC ...

Multi-Carrier and Spread Spectrum Systems: From OFDM and MC ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>MC</strong>-CDMA 85Table 2-2<strong>MC</strong>-CDMA system parametersParameterValue/characteristics<strong>Spread</strong>ing codesWalsh–Hadamard codes<strong>Spread</strong>ing code length L 8System loadFully loadedSymbol mappingQPSK, 8-PSK, 16-QAMFEC codes Convolutional codes with memory 6FEC code rate R <strong>and</strong> FEC decoder 4/5, 2/3, 1/2, 1/3 with Viterbi decoderChannel estimation <strong>and</strong> synchronization PerfectMobile radio channelUncorrelated Rayleigh fading channelThe performance of the <strong>MC</strong>-CDMA reference system presented in this section is applicableto any <strong>MC</strong>-CDMA system with an arbitrary transmission b<strong>and</strong>width B, an arbitrarynumber of sub-systems Q, <strong>and</strong> an arbitrary number of data symbols M transmitted peruser in an <strong>OFDM</strong> symbol, resulting in an arbitrary number of sub-carriers. The numberof sub-carriers within a sub-system has to be 8, while the amplitudes of the channel fadinghave to be Rayleigh-distributed <strong>and</strong> have to be uncorrelated on the sub-carriers of asub-system due to appropriate frequency interleaving. The loss in SNR due to the guardinterval is not taken into account in the results. The intention is that the loss in SNRdue to the guard interval can be calculated individually for each specified guard interval.Therefore, the results presented can be adapted to any guard interval.2.1.10.2 Synchronous DownlinkThe BER versus the SNR per bit for the single-user detection techniques MRC, EGC,ZF, <strong>and</strong> MMSE equalization in an <strong>MC</strong>-CDMA system without FEC coding is depictedin Figure 2-14. The results show that with a fully loaded system the MMSE equalizationoutperforms the other single-user detection techniques. ZF equalization restores theorthogonality between the user signals <strong>and</strong> avoids multiple access interference. However,it introduces noise amplification. EGC avoids noise amplification but does not counteractthe multiple access interference caused by the loss of the orthogonality between the usersignals, resulting in a high error floor. The worst performance is obtained with MRC,which additionally enhances the multiple access interference. As reference, the matchedfilter bound (lower bound) for the <strong>MC</strong>-CDMA system is given. Analytical approaches toevaluate the performance of <strong>MC</strong>-CDMA systems with MRC <strong>and</strong> EGC are given in Reference[55], with ZF equalization in Reference [51] <strong>and</strong> with MMSE equalization in [25].Figure 2-15 shows the BER versus the SNR per bit for the multi-user detection techniqueswith parallel interference cancellation, MLSE, <strong>and</strong> MLSSE applied in an <strong>MC</strong>-CDMA system without FEC coding. The performance of parallel interference cancellationwith adapted MMSE equalization is presented for two detection stages. The significantperformance improvements with parallel interference cancellation are obtained after the

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!