Next Article in Journal
A Review of Automatic Phenotyping Approaches using Electronic Health Records
Next Article in Special Issue
Contribution to the Channel Path Loss and Time-Dispersion Characterization in an Office Environment at 26 GHz
Previous Article in Journal
System Level Optimization for High-Speed SerDes: Background and the Road Towards Machine Learning Assisted Design Frameworks
Previous Article in Special Issue
Correlated Blocking in mmWave Cellular Networks: Macrodiversity, Outage, and Interference
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Electronics
Volume 8
Issue 11
10.3390/electronics8111234
electronics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Wideband Performance Comparison between the 40 GHz and 60 GHz Frequency Bands for Indoor Radio Channels

by
Miguel Riobó
1,
Rob Hofman
1,2,
Iñigo Cuiñas
1,
Manuel García Sánchez
1,* and
Jo Verhaevert
2
1
Signal Theory and Communications Department, University of Vigo, 36310 Vigo, Spain
2
Department of Information Technology, Ghent University/imec, 9000 Gent, Belgium
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Electronics 2019, 8(11), 1234; https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8111234
Submission received: 27 September 2019 / Revised: 22 October 2019 / Accepted: 26 October 2019 / Published: 29 October 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Millimeter-Wave (mmWave) Communications)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

When 5G networks are to be deployed, the usability of millimeter-wave frequency allocations seems to be left out of the debate. However, there is an open question regarding the advantages and disadvantages of the main candidates for this allocation: The use of the licensed spectrum near 40 GHz or the unlicensed band at 60 GHz. Both bands may be adequate for high performance radio communication systems, and this paper provides insight into such alternatives. A large measurement campaign supplied enough data to analyze and to evaluate the network performance for both frequency bands in different types of indoor environments: Both large rooms and narrow corridors, and both line of sight and obstructed line of sight conditions. As a result of such a campaign and after a deep analysis in terms of wideband parameters, the radio channel usability is analyzed with numerical data regarding its performance.
Keywords: 5G; radio channel; measurements; wideband; indoor 5G; radio channel; measurements; wideband; indoor

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Riobó, M.; Hofman, R.; Cuiñas, I.; García Sánchez, M.; Verhaevert, J. Wideband Performance Comparison between the 40 GHz and 60 GHz Frequency Bands for Indoor Radio Channels. Electronics 2019, 8, 1234. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8111234

AMA Style

Riobó M, Hofman R, Cuiñas I, García Sánchez M, Verhaevert J. Wideband Performance Comparison between the 40 GHz and 60 GHz Frequency Bands for Indoor Radio Channels. Electronics. 2019; 8(11):1234. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8111234

Chicago/Turabian Style

Riobó, Miguel, Rob Hofman, Iñigo Cuiñas, Manuel García Sánchez, and Jo Verhaevert. 2019. "Wideband Performance Comparison between the 40 GHz and 60 GHz Frequency Bands for Indoor Radio Channels" Electronics 8, no. 11: 1234. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8111234

APA Style

Riobó, M., Hofman, R., Cuiñas, I., García Sánchez, M., & Verhaevert, J. (2019). Wideband Performance Comparison between the 40 GHz and 60 GHz Frequency Bands for Indoor Radio Channels. Electronics, 8(11), 1234. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8111234

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop