Performance Analysis of UMTS Handover with the Help of WLAN
Danyan Chen, Xiaofeng Wang, and A. K. Elhakeem
Concordia University
{d_chen, xfwang, ahmed}@ece.concordia.ca
Abstract
By most predictions, fourth-generation wireless
systems will be composed of heterogeneous networks.
Two important constituent networks will be wireless
LAN (WLAN) and cellular mobile radio systems (e.g.,
UMTS). WLAN is designed for low-range, high/medium
data rate access and can be used as a complement to
larger cellular mobile radio systems. In this paper, we
consider a heterogeneous system in which WLANs are
built on the boundaries of the UMTS cells with hot spots
to provide additional bandwidth and to support
handover between cellular cells. The cellular
bandwidth reservation for handover and the new call
queueing are considered. We show that such an
integrated system can be modeled by a discrete 3-D
Markov chain. Using this analytical model, the
handover and new call blocking probabilities, queueing
probability and mean queueing delay are found under
various system parameters. These results then allow us
not only to quantify the performance gain of integrated
systems but also to optimize system parameters.
1. Introduction
To establish unified heterogeneous wireless
networks including a set of different technologies and
standards is a main feature of the fourth-generation (4G)
mobile radio systems [1][2]. Different radio access
networks have their own properties. High-tier systems
such as universal mobile telecommunication system
(UMTS) provide wide-area coverage, high mobility but
relatively low data rate [3]. Low-tier systems such as
wireless local area network (WLAN) provide local
coverage, low mobility and high/medium data rate.
Low-tier systems are complement to high-tier systems
to provide additional bandwidth and high data-rate
services. UMTS and IEEE 802.11 based WLAN have
been considered as examples for high and low tier
systems in this paper.
Various interworking and handover strategies of the
heterogeneous networks have been presented in the
literature [4]-[6]. To date, the main research attention
has been given to the interworking architecture and
signaling during the handover procedure. Performance
evaluation of quality of service (QoS) support over such
Proceedings of the 2nd Int'l Conf. on Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks (QShine’05)
0-7695-2423-0/05 $20.00 © 2005 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Staffordshire University. Downloaded on March 05,2010 at 02:47:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
infrastructures often has to rely on simulations due to
the lack of analytical models.
An important QoS indicator in cellular systems is the
handover blocking probability. Frequent handover
occurs in busy areas where cellular cell size tends to be
small. Traditional way to reducing handover blocking
probability is to reserve some channels for handover
traffic only. Often, to provide satisfactory handover
blocking probability at 0.1, 15% of the channels are to
be reserved [7]. However, this bandwidth reservation
results in both a higher new call blocking probability
and a considerable loss in bandwidth usage.
In this paper, we consider an integrated
UMTS/WLAN integrated system where WLANs are
built on the boundaries of UMTS cells. Besides
providing wireless access for their own low mobility
users, WLANs provide additional bandwidth to UMTS
networks to share the handover traffic between cellular
cells. Since WLAN has a much lower cost per unit
bandwidth than UMTS, using WLAN to help UMTS
handover is economically attractive. We show that such
an integrated system can be modeled by a discrete 3-D
Markov chain. Using this model, performance metrics
such as the new call and handover blocking probability
blocking probabilities, and the queuing probability and
mean queueing delay of new calls can be obtained under
various system parameters. Real-time traffics that
require dedicated radio resources are considered. It is
interesting note that the proposed Markov chain model
is similar to that of iCAR networks presented in [8].
The analysis results show that, with the additional
WLAN bandwidth, the handover blocking probability
can be significantly reduced. In other words, in order to
guarantee a low handover probability, less cellular
bandwidth needs to be reserved and the cellular
bandwidth can be more efficiently used. Hence, the
new call blocking probability can also be reduced.
2. System Overview
2.1 UMTS/WLAN interworking architecture
In the UMTS/WLAN interworking architecture,
WLAN act as cooperating systems to provide additional
radio resource to the cellular cells with hot spot areas.
In this study, the analysis of WLAN will be focused
on point coordinator function (PCF) in the
 infrastructured IEEE 802.11 WLAN [9]. PCF is a
centralized, polling-based access mechanism with a
Point Coordinator (PC) [9][10]. A mobile host (MH)
that requires performance guarantees from a WLAN is
required to set up a logical channel (LCH) with the PC.
The maximum number of available LCH is calculated
and kept by the PC, so that not only the QoS of the
requesting call can be guaranteed but also the QoS of all
the ongoing calls can be maintained. The non-realtime
WLAN service will be carried in distributed coordinator
function (DCF) mode by the leftover bandwidth.
In the reminder of this paper, a UMTS MH is
referred to as a cellular MH being equipped with two
interfaces communicating with the cellular base stations
(BSs) (UMTS interface) on cellular dedicated data
channel (DCH) and with PCs (WLAN interface) on
LCH. The data flows and signaling control commands
can be routed via different air interfaces, however,
transparently to the subscriber. The bandwidth that
carries signaling sequence is neglected.
2.2 System model
The scenario under investigation is shown in Figure
1. This system model is focused on the cell of interest.
A WLAN is built on the boundary between the cells of
interest and its neighboring cells. It covers a fraction
the handover region of the cell of interest and shares the
handover traffic between the cell of interest and its
neighboring cells passing through the handover region
covered by WLAN.
mµ
mµ mµu
mµu
Cell A Cell A mcµu
λo nµw/2
λn λn
(1−c)λo
(a) (b)
Figure 1. Handover of UMTS network (a) without and (b) with
the use of WLAN.
As shown in Figure 1(b), from the viewpoint of the
cell of interest (i.e., Cell A), an incoming handover and
an outgoing handover refer to the ongoing call entering
Cell A from and leaving Cell A to any of its neighboring
cells, respectively. The blocked outgoing handover will
not be counted in the following analysis of the handover
blocking probability of the cell of interest.
A handover of either type can use the WLAN
bandwidth as long as the handover region the
corresponding MH passes through is covered by a
WLAN and an available LCH can be found in this
WLAN. When a MH enters a UMTS cell during a call:
• it will be assigned an LCH if it passes WLAN covered
handover region and if any LCH is available; otherwise,
Proceedings of the 2nd Int'l Conf. on Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks (QShine’05)
0-7695-2423-0/05 $20.00 © 2005 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Staffordshire University. Downloaded on March 05,2010 at 02:47:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
• the MH will be assigned a DCH if there is any DCH
available in the UMTS cell; otherwise,
• this incoming handover will be blocked.
Upon a new call arrival:
• a DCH will be assigned if any is available; otherwise,
• the call request will wait in the queue if the queue is
not full; otherwise,
• the new call will be blocked.
Suppose that H out of a total of M available DCHs of
a cellular cell will be reserved exclusively for handover
calls. Upon a new call arrival, if the total number of
DCHs being used is less than M-H, a DCH will be
assigned; otherwise, the call request will be put in the
queue or be blocked depending on whether the queue is
full. It is assumed a MH with a new call request waiting
in the queue does not move out from one cell to another.
Both new calls and call handover are assumed to be
generated according to Poisson distributions with
average rates λn and λo, respectively. Let a and c be the
normalized WLAN coverage, with respect to the
coverage of the UMTS cell of interest and with respect
to the handover region of the UMTS cell, respectively.
The relation between a and c can be found in Appendix
A. It is assumed that the location of a UMTS MH with a
handover is uniformly distributed in the entire handover
region. Thus, a handover call is generated within the
WLAN covered handover region with probability c.
The call duration is assumed to be exponentially
distributed with mean Tc=1/µ, where µ is called the call
departure rate. The call dwell times in a UMTS cell and
in a WLAN are also assumed to be exponentially
m(1-c)µu
distributed with mean Tdu and Tdw, respectively. By
nµw/2 assuming that MHs move randomly, at a random time
instant, the probability that a MH with an ongoing call
cλo using a DCH moves out from a UMTS cell is µu=1/Tdu;
λo
the probability that a MH with an ongoing call using a
LCH of WLAN moves out of the WLAN covering area
is µw=1/Tdw. Since it is also assumed that the WLAN is
built on the boundary of two neighboring UMTS cells, a
MH with an ongoing call using an LCH moves from the
WLAN to each cell with the same probability, µw/2.
The relation between Tdu and Tdw shall be a function of
the normalized coverage of the WLAN, a. Given Tdu, a
and the geometries of the UMTS and WLAN cells, Tdw
can be found. In Appendix A, Tdw is derived for round
WLANs and UMTS cells.
3. Markov Chain Representation
The behaviors of the heterogeneous network
described above can be characterized by a
three-dimensional (3-D) discrete Markov chain with the
parameters listed in Table I. A state in the 3-D Markov
chain is defined as
(m, n, b), 0”m”M, 0”n”N, 0”b”B,
 where m and n are the numbers of the DCH and LCH
being used, respectively, and b is the number of the new
call request waiting in the queue. Since a new call
request will not wait in the queue when the number of
the DCH not being used is more than the number of
DCH supposed to be reserved for handover, states (m, n,
b) with m<M-H and b>0 do not exist. Therefore, the
total number of states in the Markov chain, Snum, is
[M+1+B(H+1)](N+1). An example with M=3, N=3,
H=1 and B=2 is given in Figure 2(a)
Four types of events can cause state transitions: new
call arrival, call completion, outgoing call handover and
incoming call handover. Define the traffic intensity as
the ratio of the arrival rate and the departure rate of a
call. The normalized traffic intensities of new calls and
incoming handovers, Τn and Τo, are defined as
Τn=λn/µ and Τo=λo/µ.
Define the normalized handover rates in UMTS and
WLAN as αu= µu/µ and αw= µw/µ, respectively. The
relation between αu and αw is given in Appendix A.
Since it is assumed the system traffic load is statistically
stable, the traffic intensity of incoming handover is
equal to that of outgoing handover calls, i.e., To=αu·Tn.
Detailed expressions of state transition probabilities
as functions of traffic intensities are given in Figure
2(b). The discussions about the state transition from
state (mi, ni, bi) to (mj, nj, bj) are as following:
1. When mi<H:
• Upon a new call arrival, a DCH will be assigned, i.e.,
nj=ni, mj=mi+1.
• Upon a call using a DCH or an LCH ends, a DCH or
an LCH will be released, i.e., nj=ni-1 or mj=mi-1.
• Upon an incoming handover outside the WLAN, a
DCH will be assigned, i.e., nj=ni, mj=mi+1.
• Upon an incoming call handover inside the WLAN
covered handover area, an LCH will be assigned if any
available can be found (ni<N), i.e., nj=ni+1, mj=mi;
otherwise, a DCH will be assigned, i.e., nj=ni, mj=mi+1.
• Upon an outgoing call handover using a DCH, the
DCH will be released (i.e., mj=mi-1) and an LCH will be
assigned if the handover passes the WLAN covered
handover region and if an available LCH can be found
(i.e., nj=ni+1).
• Upon a call handover using an LCH, the LCH will be
released (i.e., nj=ni-1) and a DCH will be assigned if the
corresponding MH moves into the intended UMTS cell
(i.e., mj=mi+1).
2. When H”mi”M:
• Upon a new call arrival, the call request will wait in
the queue if the queue is not full, i.e., bj=bi+1.
• Upon a call completion using an LCH, the LCH will
be released (i.e., nj=ni-1).
• Upon a call completion using a DCH, the DCH will
be released. If the number of available DCH is no larger
Proceedings of the 2nd Int'l Conf. on Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks (QShine’05)
0-7695-2423-0/05 $20.00 © 2005 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Staffordshire University. Downloaded on March 05,2010 at 02:47:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
TABLE I. SYSTEM PARAMETERS USED IN THE ANALYSIS
λn probability of a new call arrival in a random time unit
λo probability of a handover call in a random time unit
αu normalized handover rate in a UMTS cell, i.e., αu= µu/µ
αw normalized handover rate in a WLAN, i.e., αw= µw/µ
µ probability that a call finishes in a time unit
µu probability of a call handover from UMTS cell in a random
time unit
µw probability of a call handover from WLAN in a time unit
a normalized WLAN coverage respect to that of a UMTS cell
c normalized WLAN coverage respect to that of the
handover region of a UMTS cell
M number of available DCH in the UMTS cell of interest
N number of available LCH in a WLAN
H number of DCH reserved for handover in a UMTS cell
B maximum queue length in a UMTS cell
than H, a DCH will be assigned to a new call waiting in
the queue (i.e., if mi-1=H, bj=bi-1, mj=mi; otherwise,
bj=bi, mj=mi-1).
• Upon an incoming handover inside the WLAN
covered handover area, a DCH will be assigned (i.e.,
mj=mi+1) if any available DCH can be found.
• Upon an incoming handover outside the WLAN
covered handover area, an LCH will be assigned if any
available can be found (i.e., nj=ni+1 if ni<N); otherwise,
a DCH will be assigned (i.e., mj=mi+1).
• Upon an outgoing handover using a DCH, the DCH
will be released and an LCH will be assigned if the
handover is inside the WLAN covered handover region
and if an available LCH can be found (i.e., nj=ni+1). If
the number of available DCH becomes no larger than H,
a DCH will be assigned to a new call waiting in the
queue (i.e., bj=bi-1, mj=mi, if mi-1=H; otherwise, bj=bi,
mj=mi-1).
• Upon a handover from WLAN, a LCH will be
released (i.e., nj=ni-1). A DCH will be assigned if the
handover moves from the WLAN to the intended
UMTS cell and if an available DCH can be found (i.e.,
mj=mi-1).
Let Pr(m,n,b) be the probability that the system
status resides in state (m,n,b). The flow equilibrium
equation for state (m,n,b) can be formed by equating the
flux out of a state to the flux into this state. There are
total Snum-1 linearly independent equilibrium equations.
Besides, the conservation relation among all state
probabilities can be given as (1),
M N B
(1)
¦¦¦ Pr (m, n, b )ε (m, n, b ) = 1.
m = 0 n =0 b = 0
Collecting all the state probabilities into a column
vector p through mapping between state index (m, n, b)
and vector index i, i=1,2,…., Snum, so that the i-th entry
of p is the probability of state (mi,ni,bi), i.e.,
p(i)=Pr(mi,ni,bi), where
­ mi (N +1) + (ni +1) mi < M − H (2)
i =® .
¯{(M − H) + bi [mi − (M − H)]}(N +1) + (ni +1) mi ≥ M − H
 3,0,2 I 3,1,2 I 3,2,2 I 3,3,2
E W E W E W E
3,0,1 I 3,1,1 I 3,2,1 I 3,3,1
B
E W B E W B E W E D
3,0,0 I 3,1,0 I 3,2,0 I 3,3,0
W B W B W B D
2,0,2 H 2,1,2 H 2,2,2 H 2,3,2
B L B L B F L D G
F F
2,0,1 H 2,1,1 H 2,2,1 H 2,3,1
F L F L F L G
2,0,0 H 2,1,0 H 2,2,0 H 2,3,0
W W W

A A A C

1,0,0 H 1,1,0 H 1,2,0 H 1,3,0

W W W

A A A C

0,0,0 H 0,1,0 H 0,2,0 H 0,3,0

Figure 2(a). 3-D Markov chain representation of handover in the integrated UMTS/WLAN, M=3, N=3, H=1 and B=2.
Τn+(1-c)Τo Τn cΤo
A: m-1,n,0 m,n,0 E: m,n,b-1 m,n,b I: m,n-1,b m,n,b
m[1+(1−c)αu] n(1+αw)
(1-c)Τo Τn mcαu
B: m-1,n,b m,n,b F: m,n,b-1 m,n,b L: m,n,b m,n+1,b-1
m[1+(1−c)αu] m[1+(1−c)αu]
Τn+Τo Τn
C: m-1,n,0 m,n,0 G: m,n,b-1 m,n,b W: m,n,b mcαu
m[1+αu] m[1+αu]
Τo cΤo (n+1)αw/2
D: m-1,n,b m,n,b H: m,n-1,b m,n,b m-1,n+1,b
m[1+αu] n(1+αw/2)
Figure 2(b). State transition probabilities in terms of traffic intensities and normalized handover probabilities.

Collecting the equilibrium equations for all the states
and writing in vector-matrix form, one can get a linear
function, i.e.,
(X-Y)p=0. (3)
In (3), X and Y are the output and input transition
probability matrices, respectively. Both are square
matrices of size Snum×Snum. X is a diagonal matrix. Its
i-th diagonal element, x(i, i), is the rate flux out of state
(mi, ni, bi). The element of Y, y(i, j), gives the transition
rate from state (mj, nj, bj) to (mi, ni, bi), where mi, mj, ni
nj, bi, and bi can be obtained according to (2).
y(i, j ) = ® β w, m j n j b j ε (m j , n j , b j ) m j = mi , n j = n i + 1, b j = bi
Denote Ε as the set of states existing in the 3-D
Markov chain. An indictor function ε(m, n, b) is used to
x(i, i ) = αu , mi ni bi ε (mi + 1, ni , bi ) + α w, mi ni bi ε (mi , ni + 1, bi )
+ αb, mi ni bi ε (mi , ni , bi + 1) + βu , mi ni bi ε (mi − 1, ni , bi )
+ β w, mi ni bi ε (mi , ni − 1, bi ) + βb, mi ni bi ε (mi , ni , bi − 1) (4)
+ γ u , mi ni bi ε (mi + 1, ni − 1, bi ) + γ w, mi ni bi ε (mi − 1, ni + 1, bi )
+ γ b, mi ni bi ε (mi , ni + 1, bi − 1)
­ α u , m j n j b j ε (m j , n j , b j ) m j = mi − 1, n j = ni , b j = bi
° α ( )
° w, m j n j b j ε m j , n j , b j m j = m, n j = ni − 1, b j = bi
° α b, m j n j b j ε (m j , n j , b j ) m j = mi , n j = ni , b j = bi − 1
° β u , m j n j b j ε (m j , n j , b j ) m j = mi + 1, n j = n i , b j = bi
°
°
(5)
° β b, m n b ε (m j , n j , b j ) m j = mi , n j = ni + 1, b j = bi + 1
°
° γ u , m j n j b j ε (m j , n j , b j ) m j = mi − 1, n j = ni + 1, b j = bi
j j j

indicate whether state (m, n, b) exists, i.e., ε(m, n, b)=1 °γ ε (m j , n j , b j ) m j = mi + 1, n j = ni − 1, b j = bi

if (m,n,b)∈ Ε. x(i, i) and y(i, j) can be given by ° w, m j n j b j
°¯γ b, m j n j b j ε (m j , n j , b j ) m j = mi , n j = n i − 1, b j = bi + 1

Proceedings of the 2nd Int'l Conf. on Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks (QShine’05)
0-7695-2423-0/05 $20.00 © 2005 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Staffordshire University. Downloaded on March 05,2010 at 02:47:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 According to the position of state (m, n, b), which found (with probability PWLAN); otherwise, a DCH of the
can be applied to both (mj, nj, bj) and (mi, ni, bi), the intended cellular cell will be assigned if any available
above transition rates can be expressed as DCH can be found; otherwise this handover will be
­Tn + (1 − c)To m < M − H,n < N blocked (with probability PB_WLAN). An incoming
° T +T m < M − H,n = N
° handover being assigned an LCH will be blocked when
α u , mnb = ® n o
, α w, mnb = cTo , α b, mnb = Tn ;
° (1 − c )T o M − H ≤ m < M,n < N the corresponding MH moves out from the WLAN
°¯ To M − H ≤ m < M ,n = N covering area to the intended cellular cell (with
­m ⋅ [1 + (1 − c)αu ] n < N ­n ⋅ [1 + αu 2] m < M probability PWU) and when all the DCH of the intended
βu,mnb = ® , β w,mnb = ® ,
¯ m ⋅ [1 + α u ] n = N ¯ n ⋅ [1 + αu ] m = M
cell is being used (with probability PB_UMTS). Assuming
that the call stays in WLAN for a sufficient period of
­n ⋅ [1 + (1 − c)αu ] m = M − H time such that the states in which the system resides
βb,mnb = ® ;
¯ n ⋅ [1 + αu ] else when it enters and leaves WLAN are independent.
γ u,mnb = nαw 2, γ w,mnb = γ b,mnb = mc⋅αu . Hence, the blocking probability of such an incoming
Let s and b be (Snum-1)×1 column vectors and A be a handover call, PBo2, can be obtained as
(Snum-1)×(Snum-1) matrix, where PBo2 = PB _WLAN + PWLAN ⋅ PWU ⋅ PB _UMTS
,
p(i + 1) a(i, j ) = y (i + 1, j + 1) − x(i + 1, j + 1), where PB_WLAN, PWLAN, PWU, and PB_UMTS can be
s(i ) = , (6)
p(1) b(i ) = x(i + 1,1) − y(i + 1,1). expressed as
B M N −1 B
From (3) and (6), we have PB _WLAN = ¦Pr(M , N, b), PWLAN = ¦¦¦Pr(m, n, b),
s= A-1b. (7) b =0 m=0 n=0 b=0

Using the above equations, constrained by (1), p can N B

be found. Consequentially, the concerned performances αw ¦¦ Pr(M , n, b)

n=1 b=0
PWU = , PB _ UMTS = .
can be obtained. α w +1 M N B

It is worth noting that the above model is general and

¦¦¦Pr(m, n, b)
m=0 n=1 b=0

can be used to obtain the state probabilities of
employing different handover schemes. The state
transition probabilities need to be modified accordingly.
4. Performance Analysis
New call blocking probability
When a new call is generated, it will be blocked if
the number of available DCH not in the cell of interest is
less than the number of DCH that should be reserved for
call handover, i.e., m<M-H, and the queue is full. By
knowing the state probabilities, the blocking probability
of a new call, PBn, can be calculated as
M N
(8)
PBn = ¦ ¦ Pr(m, n, B).
m= M − H n = 0
Handover blocking probability
The handover probability is analyzed from the
viewpoint of the UMTS cell of interest, by considering
the incoming handover only.
• When an incoming handover call is generated outside
the WLAN covered handover region (with probability
1-c), it will be blocked if all the DCHs in the intended
cell are being used. Hence, the blocking probability of
such an incoming handover call, PBo1, can be given by
N B
PBo1 = ¦¦ Pr(M , n, b ).
n = 0 b =0
• When an ongoing call enters the cell of interest
through the handover region covered by WLAN with
probability c, this incoming handover call will be
assigned an LCH of WLAN if any available LCH can be
Therefore, the average blocking probability of a
handover call from the point of view of the cell of
interest, PBo, can be found as
PBo = (1− c) ⋅ PBo1 + c ⋅ PBo2. (9)
Call queueing probability
A new call will wait in the queue if, upon its arrival,
the total number of DCH being busy is no less than M-H
and the queue length does not reach its allowable
maximum. So the probability that a new call request
has to wait in the queue upon its arrival is given as:
B −1 N
ª M º (10)
PQn = ¦¦ « ¦ Pr (m, n, b )».
b = 0 n = 0 ¬m = M − H ¼
Mean Call Queueing Delay
Assume, when the concerned new call is generated, b
new call request is waiting in the queue and m LCH is
being used, i.e., the system state this new call enters
upon its arrival is (m, n, b), n”N. The position in the
queue of this call can be moved forward from b+1 to b
only when the number of available DCH is less than
M−H. Thus, this new call can not be served during time
t if the number of call completion is more than the
number of handover call arrival by no more than
m−(M−H−1)+b. Let KC(t) and KA(t) be the number of
the calls completing during time t and the number of
handover call being accepted during time t,
respectively. The probability of the queueing delay of
this new call request, Tm,b, being larger than t, Pr(Tm,b>t),
can be expressed as

Proceedings of the 2nd Int'l Conf. on Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks (QShine’05)
0-7695-2423-0/05 $20.00 © 2005 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Staffordshire University. Downloaded on March 05,2010 at 02:47:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Pr(Tm,b > t ) = Pr[K C (t ) − K A (t ) ≤ m − ( M − H − 1) + b] (11)
∞ k a + m − ( M − H −1) + b
= ¦ Pr[K A (t ) = k A ]
k A =0
Since the exact close form of queueing delay is
difficult to derive, instead an upper bound can be readily
found by the following approximations.
Approximate the handover call arrival rate seen by
the cell of interest, λcell, by λo. This is because,
according to the state diagram shown in Figure 2(a), the
exact instantaneous value of λcell, given by
­(1 − c)λo + nα w 2 n < N ,
λ = ®
cell
¯ λo
depends on the value of n. When the queue is nonempty,
the number of DCH being used instantaneously, m,
varies in the range between M−H and M. We
approximate m by M−H when M>>H.
Since the handover blocking probability is small, the
number of handover call being served can be well
approximated by the number of handover call arrival.
According to the above approximations, the
probabilities of kC call completion and kA handover call
arrival during time t, i.e., Pr[KC(t)=kC] and Pr[KA(t)=kA]
in (12), respectively, can be obtained as following:
Pr [K C (t ) = k C ] =
(λo t ) k C
exp (− λo t ),
kC !
Pr[K A (t ) = k A ] =
[(M − H )(1 + α u )µ t ] k
k A!
With knowing Pr[KC(t)=kC] and Pr[KA(t)=kA], and
then Pr(Tm,b >t), the mean queueing delay of the
concerned new call request, T m,b , can be obtained as
d [1 − Pr( Tm ,b > t ) ]
∞
(12)
T m ,b = ³ t
dt
0 to that of the system without using a WLAN, the
The summation of all m and b, M−H”m”M, b<B,
yields the mean queueing delay of a call waiting in the
queue, i.e.,
M B−1
T=
¦ ¦Q
m= M − H b=0
m,b
where PQn, the probability that a new call request enters
the queue upon its arrival, is given in (10), and Qm,b is
the probability that m DCH is being used and b call
request is waiting in the queue, i.e.,
N In Figures 7 and 8, the new call and handover
Qm,b = ¦ Pr(m, n, b).
n =0
5. Results and Discussions
In Figures 3-6, the performance measures under
concern are plotted against the traffic intensities of new
calls, Tn. In all the simulations, the traffic intensities of
incoming handover, To, is said to be αuTn to ensure
approximately the same outgoing and incoming
handover traffic. The performance is obtained with
Proceedings of the 2nd Int'l Conf. on Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks (QShine’05)
0-7695-2423-0/05 $20.00 © 2005 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Staffordshire University. Downloaded on March 05,2010 at 02:47:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
various numbers of the reserved DCH for handover, H,
and various number of the maximum queue length for
¦ Pr[K C (t ) = k C ]. new call request, B. Other system parameters are fixed
kC = 0
as M=12, a=0.3, µ=(600 sec)-1 and αu=0.3.
Since the WLAN is built on the boundary of a
cellular cell to help call handover, with the additional
WLAN bandwidth, the call handover blocking
probability can be certainly reduced. Meanwhile, the
total traffic intensity (including handover and new call
traffic intensities) seen by the UMTS BS is reduced.
Hence, the new call blocking probability can be also
improved. The improvement of the new call blocking
n=N probability is not as much as that of the handover
blocking probability. For instance, as shown in Figures
3 and 4, compared to those of the system without the
help of a WLAN (N=0), the blocking probabilities of a
new call and a handover have been reduced from 0.1666
to 0.1412 and from 0.0154 to 0.0094, respectively, by
using a WLAN (N=2) when Tn=10, H=2 and B=2.
Besides, as can be observed in Figures 3 and 4, while
increasing H or decreasing B, the r blocking probability
of a handover can also be reduce, however, in the price
of the increased blocking probability seen by a new call.
The effect of H on the blocking probabilities is far more
than that of B. However, the choice of B affects the
queueing delay more than at of H.
Figures 5 and 6 present the queueing probability of a
A
exp[(M − H )(1 + α u )µ t ].
new call and the mean queueing delay of a new call
request waiting in the queue, respectively. With the
increasing traffic intensity, the queueing probability
will be increased first. Further increasing traffic
intensity will actually result the reduced queueing
probability since the queue is constantly full when the
dt . new call traffic intensity becomes excessive. Compared
queueing probability with the help of the WLAN is less
when the traffic intensity is not excessive, and is more
after the new call traffic intensity reaches its turning
⋅ T m,b PQn ,
point. By using the additional WLAN bandwidth, the
mean queueing delay can be reduced obviously in the
whole range of the traffic intensity. It can be also found
in Figures 5 and 6 that reserving more DCH for
handover will result in a lower new call traffic intensity
turning point and a larger queueing delay.
blocking probabilities are plotted against the WLAN
channel capacity, N. The effects of the normalized
WLAN coverage, a, and the maximum queue length, B,
are also presented. Other system parameters are fixed
as M=12, Tn=10, H=2, µ=(600 sec)-1 and αu=0.3. It is
clearly shown that, by using a WLAN, both the
blocking probabilities can be improved. The more the
available WLAN bandwidth, the better is the
performance. However, when further increasing the
value of N beyond 2 (16.7% of the available bandwidth
 of UMTS network), the improvement becomes less
evident. For instance, as showing in Figures 7 and 8, by
using two LCHs (N=2), the improvements of the new
call and handover blocking probabilities are 15.23%
and 39.26%, respectively. While using two more LCHs
(N=4), the above performance metrics can be further
reduced by only 2.25% and 3.65%.
It can be also observed that, in Figures 7 and 8, with
the same N, both blocking probabilities can be reduced
by increasing the WLAN coverage since a randomly
generated handover call has more chance to use WLAN
bandwidth.
In conclusion, with the help of a WLAN, the
performance of UMTS network can be improved
effectively, such as the blocking probabilities of a new
call and a handover call, the new call queueing delay,
etc. A lower handover blocking probability can be
achieved also by reserving more DCH (i.e., larger H) or
enlarging the queue size (larger B), however, with the
price of a higher new call blocking probability.
Enlarging the WLAN coverage can also improve the
system performance. The WLAN bandwidth can be
utilized more efficiently with a larger coverage.
Besides, with more available WLAN bandwidth, the
performance can be improved more. However, the
increase of the improvement by further increasing
available WLAN bandwidth becomes slight, i.e., the
WLAN bandwidth utilization becomes less efficient.
In practice, the leftover WLAN bandwidth will be used
to carry the WLAN traffic using either DCF or PCF
mode, the performance that WLAN provide to its own
traffic mainly depends on the efficiency of the WLAN
bandwidth used by cellular calls.
6. Conclusions
This paper considered the utilization of additional
bandwidth provided by a WLAN built on the
boundaries of UMTS cells to improve the cellular call
handover performance. New call request queueing and
channel reservation for handover are considered.
A 3-D Markov chain is proposed to model such an
integrated system. Using this analytical model, we have
evaluated several performance measures under different
conditions. Numerical results have shown that, to
achieve satisfactory handover blocking probability, the
use of WLAN can significantly reduce the number of
reserved UMTS channels for handover. This in turn
leads to reduced blocking probability of new calls and
improved bandwidth usage.
Appendix A
Normalized WLAN Coverage and Dwell Times
To simplify the analysis, it is assumed that the shapes
of both UMTS cell and WLAN are circle, as shown in
Proceedings of the 2nd Int'l Conf. on Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks (QShine’05)
0-7695-2423-0/05 $20.00 © 2005 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Staffordshire University. Downloaded on March 05,2010 at 02:47:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
UMTS cell UMTS cell
WLAN
β
2r
R
Figure 9 Coverage of a UMTS cell and WLAN.
Figure 9.
The normalized WLAN coverage, with respect to the
coverage of a UMTS cell and to the handover region of
the UMTS network, a and c, respectively, can be
expressed in terms of the radiuses of a UMTS cell and
WLAN, R and r, as following:
a = r 2 R2 , c = β 2π = sin−1 (r R) π . (13)
Therefore, for given a, c can be obtained as
c = β 2π = sin−1 ( a ) π . (14)
According to the analysis in [7] about the relation
between the dwell times of two areas with different
coverage, the dwell time of WLAN, Tdw, can be
expressed in terms of the dwell time in a UMTS cell,
Tdu, and a, as
Tdw = x log a ⋅ Tdu .
10
(15)
Therefore, one can readily have
µu α u Tdw
= = = x log a .10
(16)
µ w α w Tdu
From the simulation results presented in [7], x=2 is a
proper value.
References
[1] Y. Raivio, 4G—Hype or Reality, Proceedings of the IEEE 3G
Mobile Communication Technologies (2001) 346–350. March 2002.
[2] U. Varshney, R. Jain, “Issues in emerging 4G wireless networks,”
IEEE Computer Magazine 34 (6) (2001) 94–96. June.
[3] 3GPP TS 23.060, “General Packet Radio Service, Service
Description, Stage 2”, Dec 2001.
[4] Kalle Ahmavaara et al., “Interworking architecture between 3GPP
and WLAN systems”, IEEE Communications Magazine, Nov. 2003,
pp. 74-81.
[5] Apostolis K. et al., “WLAN-GPRS integration for next generation
mobile data networks”, IEEE Communications Magazine, Oct. 2002,
pp. 112-124.
[6] Vijay K. Varma et al., "Mobility management in integrated
UMTS/WLAN networks", ICC 2003 - IEEE International Conference
on Communications, vol. 26, no. 1, May 2003, pp. 1048-1053.
[7] Szu-Lin Su, Jen-Yeu Chen and Jane-Hwa Huang, “Performance
analysis of soft handoff in CDMA cellular networks,” IEEE JSAC,
vol. 14, no. 9, December 1996, pp. 1762-1769.
[8] Evsen Yanmaz, Ozan K. Tonguz, Hongyi Wu, Chunming Qiao,
"Performance of iCAR systems: A simplified analysis technique",
ICC 2003 - IEEE International Conference on Communications,
vol. 26, no. 1, May 2003 pp. 949-953.
[9] IEEE Standard 802.11, Wireless LAN Medium Access Control
(MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) specifications (1999).
[10] J.L. Sobrinho and A.S. Krishnakumar, Real-time traffic over the
IEEE 802.11 Medium Access Control layer, Bell Labs Technical
Journal (1996) 172–187.
 Figure 3 New call blocking probability vs. the new call Figure 4 Handover blocking probability vs. the new call
traffic load, Tn, when M=12, a=0.3. traffic load, Tn, when M=12, a=0.3.

Figure 5 Queueing probability of a new cellular call vs. Figure 6 The mean queueing delay of a new call vs. the
the new call traffic load, Tn, when M=12, a=0.3. new call traffic load, Tn, when M=12, a=0.3.

Figure 7 New call blocking probability vs. WLAN Figure 8 Handover call blocking probability vs. WLAN
channel capacity, N, when M=12, Tn=10, H=2. channel capacity, N, when M=12, Tn=10, H=2.

Proceedings of the 2nd Int'l Conf. on Quality of Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks (QShine’05)
0-7695-2423-0/05 $20.00 © 2005 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Staffordshire University. Downloaded on March 05,2010 at 02:47:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.