Now 4325 visitors
Today:0 Yesterday:0
Total: 142311
215S 51P 5R
2026-10-21, Week 43 |
| Member Login |
| TACT Journal Homepage |
| Call for Paper |
| Committee |
| Find My Paper |
| Author Homepage |
| Statistics & History |
| Welcome Message |
| Paper Procedure |
| FAQ |
| Paper Archives |
| Outstanding Papers |
| Author Homepage |
| - Paper Procedure |
| - Journal Procedure |
| - Presentation Tips |
|
| Program & Proceedings |
| Program with Papers |
| Plenary Session |
| Tutorial Session |
|
| Presentation Platform |
| Hotel & Travel Info |
| About Korea |
| Accommodation |
| Transportation |
| VISA |
| Other Infomation |
|
| Photo Gallery |
| Scheduler Login |
| Seminar |
| Archives Login |
|
| Sponsors |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Save Q&A |
 |
* Edit or answer any Q&A by selecting Q&A number Hyper Link below + Write button (Save)
|
ICACT20210172 Question.1
Questioner: mrobaei.dev@gmail.com 2021-02-10 오후 2:47:09 |
ICACT20210172 Answer.1
Answer by Auhor tetsuya-iye@kke.co.jp 2021-02-10 오후 2:47:09
Chrome  Click!! |
| Thank you for your presentation. I have a question about the beamforming configuration time? In slide 8, you mentioned the number of measurements as 512 for REV and 64 for MEP. My question is, how many frames (e.g., OFDM frames, slots) are required to configure the beamforming phase-shift networks for the REV and MEP? And how do you describe the antenna size effect in the time required to configure the beamforming? Does it increase linearly? Thank you in advance for your time. |
Thank you for your question. As for your first question, it depends on the measurement accuracy. If the accuracy is sufficient, 512 received signal power values for REV and 64 received signal phase and gain value sets are enough. Assuming 1 received signal power value for a 5G NR radio frame (10 ms), the REV calibration will take more than 5 s in its current procedure. As for the antenna size effect, I think the required measurement time increases, at least, linearly with the number of antenna elements, as you said. If the number of elements increases, we need more efficient or improved calibration method. |
ICACT20210172 Question.2
Questioner: mihai.sima@ieee.org 2021-02-10 오후 2:47:24 |
ICACT20210172 Answer.2
Answer by Auhor tetsuya-iye@kke.co.jp 2021-02-10 오후 2:47:24
Chrome Click!! |
| For some reason, my question was deleted. My question refers to Slide #12. You mention that the calibration *method* over the entire bandwidth would be a further study. But are you positive that calibration can give you the required accuracy over the entire bandwidth? Otherwise, there would be no point in generating a calibration method. Thank you. |
Thank you for your question. Yes, I am positive that the calibration can give us the required accuracy over the entire bandwidth. At least, for the MEP method, we could obtain the frequency dependence of the offset values of phase and gain. Based on these results, we can make calibration value table for the entire bandwidth, although the calibration value set is determined only at 28 GHz in this work. |
ICACT20210172 Question.3
Questioner: lijingwei10@huawei.com 2021-02-10 오후 2:47:38 |
ICACT20210172 Answer.3
Answer by Auhor tetsuya-iye@kke.co.jp 2021-02-10 오후 2:47:38
Chrome Click!! |
| Thank you for you presentation.In your experiment, the length between the rotating table and horn antenna is set to 3 m, my question is why 3 m is used, and how the length affects the amplitute of the array pattern? |
Thank you for your question. Since we used the carrier frequency of 28 GHz in the millimeter-wave band, radio waves suffer severe path loss. This makes the communication reach distance short and it becomes difficult to reach further than several tens of meters unless we use massive-element antenna array or increase the power supply. On the other hand, the distance should be more than far field distance 2D^2/λ (= 0.5 m) in order to measure the array pattern properly. Thus we chose 3 m as the distance between the table and horn antenna. |
| |
