5G Networks: The Next Gen Evolution
Sandeepika Sharma
ECE Department, NIT Kurukshetra-136119
sandeepika31@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
The exponential growth of the mobile users in ubiquitous
manner has made it a timely need to attain increased
capacity, higher data rate and decreased latency for better
quality of service. This has led to the extensive research
efforts towards the development of next generation wireless
networks i.e. 5G. In this paper, we begin with the
description of the salient features, requirements and
potential technologies for realizing the 5G technology. The
mmWave radio technology being one of the promising
solutions towards achieving the data rate in the order of 1-
100 Gbps is explored for its propagation characteristics.
Two models- Close-in Free Space and Floating Intercept
are analyzed for path loss prediction at mmWaves. It is
observed that in order to maintain the received power
above a typical threshold setting of –100 dBm, the network
coverage in 5G networks is limited to 300 m in outdoor and
approximately 50 m in indoor environments in the NLOS
conditions.
Keywords: 5G networks; mmWaves; propagation
characteristics; path loss models
I. INTRODUCTION
The cellular data traffic has been increasing at an
exponential rate as the number of smart phone users
are growing rapidly. This heavy traffic load is putting
pressure on the already congested frequency
spectrum. In order to accommodate the ever growing
wireless users, there is an imperative need to explore
new radio spectrum enabling greater bandwidth and
efficient radio access technologies. Mobile
communication has been a field of research since
1980s involving different research communities and
telecom industries striving hard to overcome the
limitations of the current technology and thus
deriving different solutions to overcome those
challenges. Initial generations of the cellular
standards are limited with low data rate available to
the user [1, 2]. In order to meet the spectrum
978-1-5090-2684-5/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
55
Brahmjit Singh
ECE Department, NIT Kurukshetra-136119
brahmjit.s@gmail.com
requirements of the bandwidth hungry applications,
different solutions are being investigated to evolve
the next generation cellular systems.
In this paper, we begin with brief review of the
different aspects of 5G networks in section II.
Different 5G cellular architectures are summarily
mentioned in section-III. In Section-IV, radio
propagation path loss models applicable at mmWave
are evaluated. Finally, conclusions are drawn in
section V.
II. 5G EVOLUTION
With the exponential rise of mobile users, global
mobile data traffic is expected to grow by more than
200 times over the period from 2010 through 2020
and by nearly 20,000 times from 2010 to 2030 [3].
Total number of devices connected by global mobile
communications network will reach 100 billion in
near future. It puts stringent requirements to develop
next generation wireless network- 5G. This standard
is expected to possess the following features:
• Network Capacity: The network capacity of the 5G
cellular systems should be 1000 times that of the
4G network. The system spectral efficiency
achieved in the advanced LTE system is 30
bits/s/Hz/site employing up to 8×8 MIMO, which
will be further increased in 5G cellular networks.
• Peak Data Rate: 4G network provides peak data
rate of 100 Mbps for high mobility (up to 360km/h)
and 1Gbps for stationary and pedestrian users
whereas in 5G cellular networks the peak data rate
required is 1Gbps for mobile users and 10 Gbps for
stationary users thus providing the fiber like
Internet services.
• User Plane Latency: LTE-A advanced 4G network
provides the round trip latency of 20 ms. However,
5G standards are expected to provide the latency
less than 1 ms (single way uplink/downlink delay )
• Spectrum Sharing: Along with the new spectrum
allocation its efficient utilization is also necessary
and therefore 5G cellular networks will be
integrated with smart radio technologies, for
example, cognitive radios for efficient utilization of
licensed and under-utilized spectrum.
A. 5G ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES
In this section, we give a summary of the potential
technologies being explored to achieve the expected
performance as the mentioned in the preceding
section:
• Multiple Radio Access Technologies (RATs): 5G
network will be a combination of multiple RATs in
order to achieve the 1000 times network capacity to
that of 4G network. These involve advanced WLAN
and Wi-Fi technologies thereby increasing the
coverage and providing seamless handovers over 5G
cellular networks. For example, IEEE 802.11ac is
the latest evolution of Wi-Fi technology which can
be integrated into the network to provide the
wireless broadband connections with high data rates
on order of Gbps [4]. Major telecom companies are
planning to merge 3G/4G/Wi-Fi transceivers into a
single base station and also making the mobile
station intelligent enough to connect to the suitable
radio access network (RAN), based on the QoS
requirements.
• Small Cell Deployment: The 5G small cells
network comprises of micro-, pico- or femto-cells,
which is referred to as heterogeneous network
(HetNet). This HetNet may be formed either by
overlaying the small cells of same technology
(multi-tier HetNet) or of different technologies
(multi-RAT HetNet) [5].
• Self-Organizing Network: The concept of SON is
immensely useful in hyper-dense small cell
deployment. It helps to introduce the capability in
small cells to synchronize autonomously with the
network and intelligently adjust their radio
coverage. It thus helps minimize the inter-cell
interference [4].
• Machine Type Communication (MTC): MTC is
performed in small cell area out of cellular standards
using either bluetooth or WLAN in ad-hoc mode. It
requires very low latency, real-time and remote
controlling of mobile devices [6].
56
• Millimeter wave technology: Since the sub 3 GHz
band is becoming congested, millimeter wave
(mmWave) band is being explored for mobile
communications. This band extends from 30 to 300
GHz providing huge bandwidth for communication.
Due to high operating frequencies, omnidirectional
path loss is high as compared to conventional sub 3
GHz band. This can be compensated through
directional transmission and suitable beamforming
strategies [7]. The mmWave signals are very
susceptible to shadowing, resulting in outages and
reduced channel quality. Further, channel
fluctuations are high in mmWave band as for a
given velocity the channel coherence time will be
very small and the channel will change at much
faster rate. Again, device power consumption also
increases as the MS has to support large number of
antennas [8]. Thus mmWave cellular networks are
the current area of research where lot of experiments
has been performed to analyze its coverage and
capacity and the ways and means to make it suitable
for cellular communications.
• Cognitive Radio: Cognitive Radio is defined as the
radio that can adapt its transmission parameters
according to the characteristics of the environment
in which it operates [9]. It is a technology enabler
for enhanced utilization of licensed frequency band
in the opportunistic manner. Cognitive radio based
networks result in efficient utilization of radio
resources, improving interference coordination in
HetNets and increasing the capacity and coverage of
the network [10].
III. ARCHITECTURE OF 5G NETWORKS
(a). Two-tier Architectures: It consists of two tiers
separating the indoor and outdoor users. An outside
base station (OBS) with large antenna array at the
top tier covers the macro cell. An indoor base
station (IBS) constitutes the lower tier. The inside
users will communicate to the IBSs using short
range communication technologies, e.g., Wi-Fi,
mmWave, Ultra-wide Band (UBW) or VLC (visible
light communication). Such architecture will result
in reduced penetration losses and offers improved
data rate, spectral efficiency, cell average
throughput and energy efficiency [11].
 (b). Cognitive Radio Based Architectures: Campaigns, various path loss models have been
According to [12], these architectures are of two proposed for operating frequencies lying in the
types: (a) non-cooperative and (b) cooperative mmWave band.
CRNs. Non-cooperative CRN defines two radio The LOS path loss usually follows free space
interfaces, one which operates at the licensed propagation based on Friis’s law for distance less
channels and the other operates at the temporary than 100 m [17]. The frequency and distance
unoccupied channels referred to as cognitive dependent path loss is given as
channels. In cooperative CRN, the licensed channel
will be accessed in opportunistic manner i.e. when ( , ) = 32.4 + 20 + 20 (1)
the primary user is not accessing the licensed
channel. Where, ( , ) is the free space path loss in dB, f is
the frequency in GHz and d is the distance between
(c). Device to Device (D2D) Communication the transmitter and the receiver in meters.
Based Architectures: It allows one mobile station
to communicate with another one without involving Authors in [18] have proposed path loss models for
the IBS, OBS or core network. It offers the cellular networks operating at 28GHz and 38GHz.
advantages of link reliability, higher data rate, They modified the conventional SUI path loss model
instant communication, peer to peer file sharing, as represented by Eq. (2a) to predict the path loss at
online gaming, energy efficiency and traffic mmWave frequencies. In the modified SUI model, a
offloading from IBSs. Interference though major mean slope correction factor ( ) is added which
limitation can be managed by CRNs in D2D is obtained directly from the NLOS empirical results
communication [13]. as given by (2b)
(i) Energy Efficient Architectures: Energy
consumption is the major concern in the next gen ( )( )= ( ) + 10 + + + (2a)
networks. It emphasizes on the principle of no more where,
cells which decouples the uplink (UL) and downlink ( ) = 20
4
(DL) channels as well as the signaling and data [14].
= − .ℎ +
ℎ
IV. RADIO PROPAGATION MODELS = 6. ( /2000)
ℎ
= −10.8
2
The mmWave technology is seen as the key
component of 5G cellular networks. For an effective
( , ) = × ( )( ) − ( )( ) +
system design, it is imperative to analyze the
( )+ (2b)
mmWave propagation in different environments. As
the mmWave ranges from 30-300 GHz, these are
more vulnerable to shadowing. Also there is
significant impact of atmospheric oxygen, fog and
rain on their propagation characteristics. Due to
weak diffraction ability, these waves are sensitive to
blockage by obstacles such as bricks resulting in 40-
80 dB loss [15]. Human body also results in 20-35 dB
loss [16]. Fig. 1 illustrates the free space path loss at
different operating frequencies. It is observed that the
signal attenuation is approximately 20 dB greater at
mmWave frequencies than that at microwaves used
for 3G/4G networks.
In order to characterize the propagation at mmWave,
a lot of measurement campaigns are being conducted
Fig.1: Path loss at different operating frequencies
around the world. On the basis of these measurement

57
 110
( )( ) = ( , ) + 10 + (4)

100 4
( , ) = 10

90

Here d ≥ where = 1m and n is the path loss

Path loss (dB)

28 GHz (NLOS)
80 exponent.
( )( ) = + × 10 log ( ) + (5)
70

∼ (0, )
60
Here ‘d’ is the distance in meters, α is the best
50
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
(minimum mean square error) fit floating intercept
Distance between Tx and Rx (m)
point, β is the slope of the best fit and is the
Fig.2: Path loss prediction using modified SUI model at 28 GHz lognormal shadowing variance.
Assuming the parameter values as given in [8,19,20]
It is further observed that the path loss predicted by for α, β and σ at 28 GHz and 73 GHz, path loss
the modified SUI model at 28 GHz is less than the values are estimated for NLOS condition in outdoor
values predicted by the conventional SUI model at as well as indoor environments as depicted in Figs.3
the same frequency. This is due to the fact that and 4 respectively.
directional antennas (25 dBi gain) are used at base
station and receiver location. This compensates for 170

the free space path loss although additional losses are

160
incorporated arising out of the atmospheric and rain
attenuation.
150
Fig. 2 shows the path loss predicted by modified SUI 28GHz NLOS
Path loss (dB)

73GHz NLOS
model at 28 GHz which is approximately 25 dB less 140
than that as determined by the free space model as
illustrated in Fig. 1. These results also justify the use 130

of directional antennas at mmWaves.

120
Received signal power ( ) can be computed as:
110
( ) = ( )+ + − ( ) (3) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance between Tx and Rx (m)

where is the transmitter power, and are (a) Floating intercept path loss model

the transmitter and receiver antenna gain 170

respectively.
160

Assuming –100 dBm as the minimum acceptable 150

received power for the systems and 24 dBm as the

140
transmit power, path loss must be less than 90 dB to
Path loss (dB)

maintain the received power greater than the 130

28GHz NLOS

minimum threshold setting of –100 dBm. This link 120

73GHz NLOS

budget offers 300 m as the maximum separation

110
between transmitter and receiver.
100

The close-in free space and floating intercept model 90

as expressed by Eqs. (4) and (5) respectively predict 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Distance between Tx and Rx (m)
400 450 500

the path loss at 28- and 73 GHz in a typical indoor (b) Close in free space path loss model
office environment [19]. The same path loss models
are investigated in outdoor environment in [8,20]. Fig.3.Path loss prediction at 28 and 73 GHz in outdoor scenario

58
 220 220

200
200

180
180
Path loss (dB)

P ath los s (dB )

160
28GHz LOS
28GHz NLOS 160
140 73GHz LOS
73GHz NLOS
140
120
outdoor NLOS
indoor NLOS
100 120

80 100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance between Tx and Rx (m) Distance between Tx and Rx (m)

(a)
(a) Close in free space path loss model
220
170

160
200

150

180
140
28GHz LOS
P ath los s (dB )
Path loss (dB)

28GHz NLOS
130
73GHz LOS 160
73GHz NLOS
120

110 140
outdoor NLOS
100 indoor NLOS
120
90

80 100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance between Tx and Rx (m) Distance between Tx and Rx (m)

(b) Floating intercept path loss model (b)

Fig 4. Path loss prediction at 28 and 73 GHz in indoor environment Fig 5. Path loss prediction at 73 GHz (a) CI path loss model
(b) using FI path loss model
The CI free space reference model is based on path
loss exponent only, which varies marginally for both Assuming –100 dBm as the minimum acceptable
single and multiple frequency cases. In the FI model, received power for the indoor environment and 28
α and β parameters can vary significantly across GHz frequency, 24 dBm as the transmit power at the
frequency of interest and hence more sensitive and base station and the transmitter and receiver antenna
prone to error. As illustrated in Fig.5, the signal gain as 20 dBi, it is examined that the maximum
attenuation in indoor NLOS environment is transmitter receiver separation can be 50 m in NLOS
approximately 40 dB greater than that in the outdoor condition to maintain the received power greater than
case when predicted by using CI free space model. It the threshold value. Hence the permissible cell size in
is very interesting to note that the path loss indoor environment is greatly reduced as compared to
predictions by the floating intercept model are in that in outdoor environments at mmWave. This is
close agreement with both indoor and outdoor NLOS primarily due to the sensitivity to blockage by
environments. Hence CI free space reference path obstacles such as bricks, humans and other indoor
loss model is simpler and more accurate as compared materials.
to FI path loss model.

59
 V. CONCLUSION [13] A.Asadi, Q.Wang, and V.Mancuso, “A Survey on device-to-
device communication in cellular networks”, IEEE
In this paper, we have provided a brief overview of Communications Surveys and Tutorials, vol.16, no. 4, pp.
potential key technologies being considered for the 1801-1819, 2014.
design and development of 5G cellular networks. [14] Chih-Lin, C.Rowell, S.Han, Z.Xu, G.Li, Z.Pan, “Towards
Green and Soft: A 5G Perspective”, IEEE Communication
Different cellular architectures are also identified. Magzine, vol.52, no. 2, pp. 66-73, Feb 2014.
Radio propagation characteristics of mmWave are [15] F.Khan and Z.Pi, “An introduction to millimeter wave mobile
broadband systems”, IEEE Commun. Mag., vol.49, no. 6,
analyzed through numerical results. It is observed pp.101-107, June 2011
that in order to maintain the received power above a [16] J.S.Lu, D.Steinbach, P.Cabrol and P.Peitrakshi, “Modelling
threshold typically –100 dBm, the network coverage human blockers in millimeter wave radio links”, ZTE
Commun., vol.10, no.4, pp.23-28, Dec-2012.
in 5G networks would be limited to 300 m in outdoor
[17] T.S.Rappaport, Wireless Communications: Principles and
and approximately 50 m in indoor environments in Practice, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice-
the NLOS conditions. These results may be used as Hall,2002
[18] A.I. Sulyman, A.T.Nassar, M.K.Samimi, G.R.M.Jr.,
reference to the link budget analysis of the 5G T.S.Rappaport, and A.Alsanie, “Radio Propagation Path Loss
wireless networks. Models for 5G Cellular Networks in the 28GHz and 38GHz
Millimeter-Wave Bands”, IEEE Communication Magazine,
vol.52, no.9, pp.78-86, Sep 2014.
[19] G.R.Macartney, T.S.Rappaport, S.SHU, S.Deng, “Indoor
REFERENCES Office Wideband Millimeter-Wave Propagation
Measurements and Channel Models at 28GHz and 73GHz for
[1] K. R.Santhi, V.K.Srivastava, G.Senthil Kumaran, A.Butare, Ultra Dense 5G wireless Networks”, Special edition on Ultra
“Goals of true broad band’s wireless next wave (4G-5G),” Dense Cellular Networks, vol.3,pp. 2388 – 2424, Oct 2015
Proc. IEEE 58th Veh. Technol. Conf., vol 4, pp.2317-2321, [20] S.Sun, T.S.Rappaport, S.Rangan, “Propagation Path Loss
Oct 2003. Models for 5G Urban Micro-and Marcro-Cellular Scenarios”,
[2] T.Halonen, J. Romero, and J.Melero, Eds., “GSM, GPRS and 2016 IEEE 83rd Vehicular Technology Conference
EDGE Performance: Evolution towards 3G/UMTS”. New (VTC2016-Spring), May 2016.
York, NY, USA: Wiley, 2003.
[3] IMT-2020 (5G) Promotion Group, “5G vision and
requirements,”www.imt-2020.cn.
[4] Jonathan Rodriguez, “Fundamentals of 5G Mobile
Networks”, 1st ed. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley,
April 2015.
[5] Qualcomm (2014) 1000x: More Small Cells- Hyper-Dense
Small Cell Deployments.
www.qualcomm.com/documents/1000x-more-small-cells.
[6] W.H Chin, Z.Fan, R.Haines, “Emerging Technologies and
Research Challenges for 5G Wireless Netwroks”, IEEE
Wireless Communication, vol. 21, no.2, pp. 106 - 112, April
2014.
[7] Yong Niu, Young Li, Depeng Jin, “A Survey of Millimeter
Wave Communications (mmWave) for 5G: Opportunities
and Challenges”, SpringerLink Wireless Network, Volume
21, no.8, pp. 2657–2676, Nov 2015.
[8] Sundeep Rangan, T. S. Rappaport “Millimeter-Wave Cellular
Wireless Networks: Potentials and Challenges “Proceedings
of IEEE, vol. 102, no.3, pp. 366-385, March 2014
[9] Akyildiz, I.F., Lee, W.Y., Varun, M.C. and Mohanty, S.,
“Next Generation of Dynamic Spectrum Access in Cognitive
Radio Wireless Networks: A Survey”, ELSEVIER Computer
Networks, vol.50, pp. 2127-2159, May 2006.
[10] Tandra, R., Mishra, S.M., Sahai, A., “What is spectrum hole
and what does it take to recognize one?” Proceedings IEEE,
vol. 97, no.5, pp. 824-848, 2009.
[11] C.Wang, F.Haider, X.Gao, X.You, Y.Yang, D.Yaun,
H.M.Aggoune, H.Haas, S.Fletcher, and E.Hepsaydir,
“Cellular Architecture and key technologies for 5G wireless
communication networks”. IEEE Communications
Magazine, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 122-130, 2014.
[12] X.Hong, J.Wang, C.Wang, and J.Shi, “Cognitive radio in 5G:
a perpective on energy-spectral efficiency trade-off”, IEEE
Communications Magazine, vol. 52, no.7, pp. 46-53, 2014.

60