Monday, 3 April 2017

Backhauling problems driving up deployment costs?


Going through iDate Digiworld Yearbook 2016, I came across this section on small cells. What caught my attention was the last sentence stating that in Europe, small cells deployments are "being hampered by installation and backhauling problems which are driving up deployment costs".

While this is generally true, there are ways around it when it comes to coverage rather than capacity. When small cells are being used for capacity, there needs to be a high throughput backhaul. Where capacity is the main reason, its generally time and cost which is of essence.

I have talked about how in-band backhaul (IBBH) could be used in case of providing rural coverage and emergency / temporary communications.


I get asked about IBBH many a times. A simple way to explain would be to use the diagram above. If the operator has enough spectrum, the macro layer (frequency f1) can provide backhaul to a small cell that transmits on another frequency (f2). This way there is no interference between macro cells and small cells. In case of in-band backhaul, the small cell would be transmitting at the same frequency (f1). Here, managing interference between macro cell and small cells is the biggest challenge.

Even though I have shown mesh links in the pictures above, its not a must. It just provides flexibility of expanding the coverage further in case the macro connectivity cannot reach other sites.

IBBH is not just a cheap option for backhauling, it also allows very quick deployments. I have seen sites go up within a few hours based on this option. While not perfect, it is a good compromise for extending the coverage.


Related posts and links:

No comments:

Post a comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.