Field strength values are presented for 1%, 5% and 10% of time. No aggregation (summation) of field strength has been used. The plots for the case studies show the highest field strength in each pixel of calculation 2.2.1.2.4 Analysis 2.2.1.2.4.1 Generic study Figure 5 the basic configuration for the assessment of the separation distance between interfering DTTB transmitter and victim IMT base-station receiver (uplink). 5 Basic configuration for the assessment of separation distance between interfering DTTB transmitter and victim IMT base-station receiver (uplink) For this generic study, only Recommendation ITU-R P.1546 was used. There is no point in using other methods based on terrain for generic studies. The separation distances were calculated for all the field strength thresholds calculated in Table 14, which correspond to two different levels of protection and to the possible use of cross polarisation as a mitigation technique (or alternatively the use of full antenna discrimination). Finally, the prediction was made for percentages of time, 1%, 5% and 10% to consider also a range of protection levels in terms of acceptable time percentage for the interference. The DTTB coverage radius corresponding to the two reference transmitters are: 70.53 km for the high transmitter (HP); – 32.11 km for the medium power transmitter (MP). – TABLE 15 Required separation distances between interfering DTTB transmitter and victim IMT base-station receiver (uplink) Antenna Target Field 1% 5% 10% e.r.p. height Strength Comment time time time (m) (dB(µV/m)) 200 kW 300 19.3 427 355 318 of dB I/N –6 200 kW 300 25.3 359 290 258 of 0 dB I/N 200 kW 300 31.1 297 235 207 Cross polar and of dB I/N –6 200 kW 300 37.1 235 183 159 polar and of 0 dB I/N 5 kW 150 19.3 269 215 192 of dB I/N –6 5 kW 150 25.3 211 167 148 of 0 dB I/N 5 kW 150 31.1 161 126 110 Cross polar and of dB I/N –6 5 kW 150 37.1 117 89 76 Cross polar and of 0 dB I/N
Field strength values are presented for 1%, 5% and 10% of time. No aggregation (summation) of field strength has been used. The plots for the case studies show the highest field strength in each pixel of calculation 2.2.1.2.4 Analysis 2.2.1.2.4.1 Generic study Figure 5 the basic configuration for the assessment of the separation distance between interfering DTTB transmitter and victim IMT base-station receiver (uplink). 5 Basic configuration for the assessment of separation distance between interfering DTTB transmitter and victim IMT base-station receiver (uplink) For this generic study, only Recommendation ITU-R P.1546 was used. There is no point in using other methods based on terrain for generic studies. The separation distances were calculated for all the field strength thresholds calculated in Table 14, which correspond to two different levels of protection and to the possible use of cross polarisation as a mitigation technique (or alternatively the use of full antenna discrimination). Finally, the prediction was made for percentages of time, 1%, 5% and 10% to consider also a range of protection levels in terms of acceptable time percentage for the interference. The DTTB coverage radius corresponding to the two reference transmitters are: – 70.53 km for the high transmitter (HP); – 32.11 km for the medium power transmitter (MP). TABLE 15 Required separation distances between interfering DTTB transmitter and victim IMT base-station receiver (uplink) e.r.p. Antenna height (m) Target Field Strength (dB(µV/m)) 1% time 5% time 10% time Comment 200 kW 300 19.3 427 355 318 I/N of –6 dB 200 kW 300 25.3 359 290 258 I/N of 0 dB 200 kW 300 31.1 297 235 207 Cross polar and I/N of –6 dB 200 kW 300 37.1 235 183 159 polar and I/N of 0 dB 5 kW 150 19.3 269 215 192 I/N of –6 dB 5 kW 150 25.3 211 167 148 I/N of 0 dB 5 kW 150 31.1 161 126 110 Cross polar and I/N of –6 dB 5 kW 150 37.1 117 89 76 Cross polar and I/N of 0 dB
R-REP-BT.2337-2014-MSW-E.docx