Scribd
Upload
195 views7 pages

5G PHR Calculation

The document discusses power headroom reporting (PHR) calculation in 5G networks. It covers topics like beam-specific power control, PHR processes that include multiple transmission parameter sets, and how to handle PHR for different waveforms and virtual PHR reporting without an actual transmission.

Uploaded by

pacificblue2024
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
195 views7 pages

5G PHR Calculation

The document discusses power headroom reporting (PHR) calculation in 5G networks. It covers topics like beam-specific power control, PHR processes that include multiple transmission parameter sets, and how to handle PHR for different waveforms and virtual PHR reporting without an actual transmission.

Uploaded by

pacificblue2024
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 7

5G PHR calculation

In 5G networks, the UE's power headroom reporting is based on the

corresponding PUSCH transmission, and NR supports specific beam

power control as a baseline. Supports power control for multi-panel

transmission on the UE side. Beam-specific path loss is supported for

ULPC (Uplink Power Control). For beam-specific power control, NR

defines the open-loop and closed-loop parameters for a specific beam.

If the UE can be configured for both waveforms, the gNB knows the

difference in power headroom for the different waveforms.

In order to maintain the efficiency of power amplifier (PA: power

amplifier), it is better to introduce different UL-PC mechanisms for DFT-

S-OFDM and CP-OFDM respectively, because there is a significant CM

(Cubic Metric) between these two transmission waveforms significant

difference. Since CP-OFDM has a higher peak-to-average power ratio

than DFT-S-OFDM, in order to avoid signal distortion when UE uses the

maximum power to transmit uplink signals, the maximum transmission

power should be higher than DFT-S-OFDM reduce.

So far, mainly two candidate methods have been proposed to reflect the
power backoff on Pcmax.
Method 1: Power Offset for Pcmax
Since the gNB knows the PHR difference for different waveforms, for

simplicity, the power offset ▲ can be a specified value based on the CM

difference between CP-OFDM and DFT-S-OFDM.


NR supports beam-specific power control as a baseline, so some open-

loop and closed-loop parameters may be beam-specific. PHR is not a

direct parameter of uplink power calculation, but has implications for

the gNB when it decides possibly a beam-specific TPC command. From

this point of view, the beam-specific PHR appears to be beneficial for

precise power control.

In this recommended framework, the gNB configures or reconfigures

one or more UL TxPara (UL transmit parameter set) settings for the UE.

For each of PUSCH, PUCCH and SRS, the gNB may configure one or

more ULTxPara sets, and each ULTxPara set includes one or more

ULTxPara sets (transmit parameters set). ULTxPara set is equivalent to a

power control loop. Each (ULTxPara set) includes at least the following

information for PUSCH and PUCCH:

o TX beam (group) indication, indicating transmission resources


o UE specific part of P0
For SRS transmission, PL settings can be configured under SRS resource

setting. Then PUSCH and PUCCH transmissions can be linked to a

specific SRS resource (group) to obtain the corresponding PL.


o PL settings, including downlink RS resource indication for path loss
measurement.
The ULTxPara set ID if multiple ULTxPara sets are configured.

Generally, the PHR process should be maintained based on the power

control loop. If uplink transmissions are scheduled on multiple transmit

beams simultaneously, the PHR should be considered as a power

headroom calculation for the total transmit power of all these transmit

beams. The gNB configures PHR settings via RRC signal or MAC CE,

which includes the following information,

o Timers, refers to two timers similar to LTE periodicPHR-


Timer and prohibitPHR-Timer
o PL change threshold, referring to dl-PathlossChange similar to LTE
o PHR process indication, refers to the PHR process ID and its ULTxPara
set ID list.
For the convenience of analysis, it is assumed that a PHR process

indicator contains two PHR processes, as shown in Figure 1. The first

includes ULTxPara set ID#1 and the second includes ULTxPara set

ID#3+#4, so UE maintains PHR process for both, monitoring and

updating triggers independently parameter. ULTxPara set #3+#4

indicates that the associated PHR process assumes the existence of two

concurrent PC loops.
PHR calculation:
Unlike LTE, NR may have multiple beam pairs for uplink transmission,

which means that multiple BPLs may need to be monitored. According

to the above PC framework, each PHR process reports a PHR. If the PHR

process includes multiple ULTxPara sets, the beam links of these

ULTxPara sets shall be used simultaneously, and the PHR of this PHR set

shall reflect the headroom of the sum of the individual powers of all

beam links.

PHR = PCMAX - (P1 + P2)

Among them, PCMAX is the maximum transmit power of the UE.

Triggering conditions:

In LTE, RRC controls power headroom reporting by configuring two

timers periodicPHR-Timer and prohibitPHR-Timer , and sets the

measured downlink pathloss change and required due to power

management by signaling dl-PathlossChange Power back. There are

also events designated as PHR triggering conditions. One condition is

that the prohibitPHR-Timer has expired or has expired and the pathloss

has changed by more than dl-PathlossChange dB since the last


transmission of the PHR in the MAC entity when the MAC entity has

uplink resources for new transmissions .

Considering multiple TX beam transmissions in NR, multiple BPLs may

need to be monitored. In this case, how to realize the PL change

condition is a problem. Since PHR is related to the total power of all

beam pair links, PL changes should be evaluated in the same way, which

means that PL changes should reflect the sum of all beam pair link PL

changes.

For example, suppose the PHR process ID#2 includes two ULTxPara

sets: ULTxPara set#3 and ULTxPara set#4, each with a TX beam called TX

beam 3 and TX beam 4. Suppose the last PHR of PHR process ID#2 is

sent at time t0, the PL of TX beam#3 is marked as PL1(t0), and the PL of

TX beam#4 is marked as PL2 ( t0), at time t1, the PLs of TX beams #3

and #4 are marked as PL1(t1) and PL2(t1), respectively.

(PL1(t1) - PL1(t0)) + (PL2(t1) - PL2(t0)) >= PathlossChange

In LTE, when there is no actual transmission, the UE needs to calculate

PHR, also known as virtual PHR. In NR, the situation is more

complicated due to the support of multi-beam, two waveforms. For the


multi-beam case, under the above PC framework, both the real PHR and

the virtual PHR assume the same beam pair link based on their relative

PHR process IDs.

As mentioned above, for both waveforms, two PHR methods do not

require assumptions, and the options for one PHR method are shown

below.

o Option 1: Based on Default Waveform


If the UE is configured with a default waveform for virtual PHR

reporting, the virtual PHR shall be calculated using the assumptions of

this default waveform. For example, DFT-S-OFDM can be considered as

the default waveform for robustness

o ption 2: Waveform based on last transmission


UEs tend to hold their waveforms for long periods of time unless a

special event trigger changes to another. As long as the gNB and UE

simultaneously assume the same waveform, there is no ambiguity.

You might also like