Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Energy efficient load balancing for future self-organized shared networks

  • Published:
Telecommunication Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Energy is an expensive commodity in long term evolution-advanced (LTE-A) networks, spurring a myriad of research approaches in recent years to attempt to minimize energy consumption in LTE-A, usually from the mobile users’ perspective. In this work, the energy consumption of the network is analyzed, according to the operators’ point of view. Network sharing and self-organized network (SON) technologies are attractive solutions for cost reduction, and for the minimization of energy utilization in LTE-A network. In this paper, a novel framework is provided using a self-organized load balancing (SO-LB) algorithm for minimizing energy cost per bit based on the scope of 3GPP standardization. Obtained simulation results show that by employing SO-LB algorithm in a shared network, it is possible to achieve up to 15–20 % savings in energy consumption when compared to LTE-A non-shared networks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mumtaz, S., Yang, D., Monteiro, V., Rodriguez, J., & Politis, C. (2012). Green ICT: Self-organization aided network sharing in LTE-A. Journal of Green Engineering, 2(3), 215–232.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. (2008). ICT and CO\(_2\) emissions, http://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/postpn319.

  3. Gartner. (2007). Gartner Estimates ICT Industry Accounts for 2 percent of global CO\(_{2}\) emissions. http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/503867.

  4. European Commission. EUROPE 2020 TARGETS: Climate change and energy. http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/themes/13_energy_and_ghg.

  5. Mumtaz, S., & Rodriguez, J. (2013). Green Communication in 4G Wireless Systems. River Publishers. ISBN 978-87-92982-05-6.

  6. Zehle, S., & Friend, G. (2010). Network Sharing Business Plan. http://www.coleago.co.uk/, July 2010.

  7. BMI-T, Mobile Network Sharing: Benefits and Pitfalls. http://www.bmi-t.co.za/node/199.

  8. 3GPP TR 36.902 V2.0.0. (2009). Self-configuring and self-optimizing network use cases and solutions (Release 9), August 2009.

  9. Ericsson. (2003). Shared Networks an operator alternative to reduce initial investments, increase coverage and reduce Time to Market for WCDMA by, pp. 1–9.

  10. Nokia. (2001). Network Sharing in 3G.

  11. Northstream. (2002). 3G Rollout Status.

  12. Frisanco, T., Tafertshofer, P., Lurin, P., & Ang, R. (2008). Infrastructure sharing and shared operations for mobile network operators from a deployment and operations view. In IEEE Network operations and management symposium (pp. 129–136).

  13. Bousia, A., Antonopoulos, A., Alonso, L., & Verikoukis, C. (2012). Green distance-aware base station sleeping algorithm in LTE-advanced. IEEE ICC, June 2012, Ottawa, Canada.

  14. Bousia, A., Kartsakli, E., Antonopoulos, A., Alonso, L., & Verikoukis, C. (2013) Game theoretic approach for switching off base stations in multi-operator environments. IEEE ICC, June 2013, Budapest, Hungary.

  15. 3GPP. (2001). Overview of 3GPP release 8 v. 0.1.1, Tech. Rep., June 2001.

  16. 3GPP TR 22.951. (2012-09). Service aspects and requirements for network sharing (Release 11), V11.0.0 .

  17. 3GPP TR 22.852. (2013–06). Study on Radio Access Network (RAN) sharing enhancements. Release 12, V12.0.0.

  18. 3GPP TR 23.251. (2012). Network sharing: Architecture and functional description. V11.3.0.

  19. Hu, H., Zhang, J., Zheng, X., Yang, Y., & Wu, P. (2010). Self-configuration and self-optimization for LTE networks. Communications Magazine, IEEE, 48(2), 94100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Boggis, J., Castro, J., Liu, H., Minokuchi, A., Salam, D., Schwinghammer, P., & Shahbaz, M. (2006). Next generation mobile networks beyond HSPA & EVDO. A white paper by the NGMN alliance, 5 December 2006.

  21. Use cases for self-organizing networks. D2(1), v1.0, March 2008 http://www.fp7-socrates.eu/?q=node/1.

  22. 3GPP TSG RAN3, R3–071438, Load balancing SON Use case. Athens: Greece, Alcatel-Lucent, August, 2007.

  23. Costa-Perez, X., Swetina, J., Guo, T., & Mahindra, R. (2013). Radio access network virtualization for future mobile carrier networks. IEEE Communications Magazine, 51(7), July.

  24. Zhang, Y., & Leung, C. (2009). Cross-layer resource allocation for real-time services in OFDM-based cognitive radio systems. Springer Telecommunication Systems Journal, 42(1–2), 97–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Chóliz, J., Hernndez, Á., Alastruey, I., & Valdovinos, A. (2012). Coexistence and interworking between UMTS and UWB: A performance evaluation of a UMTS/UWB interoperability platform. Springer Telecommunication Systems Journal, 49(4), 409–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Salem, M., Adinoyi, A., Rahman, M., Yanikomeroglu, H., Falconer, D., & Kim, Young-Doo (2009). Fairness-aware joint routing and scheduling in ofdma-based cellular fixed relay networks. IEEE International Conference on Communication 2009 (pp. 1–6), June 2009.

  27. Sunghyun, C., Jang, E. W., & Cioffi, J. M. (2009). Handover in multihop cellular networks. IEEE Communication Magazine, 47(7), 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pabst, R., Walke, B. H., Schultz, D. C., Herhold, P., Yanikomeroglu, H., Mukherjee, S., et al. (2004). Relay-based deployment concepts for wireless and mobile broadband radio. IEEE Communication Magazine, 42(9), 8089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hu, H., Yanikomeroglu, H., Falconer, D. D., & Periyalwar, S. (2004). Range extension without capacity penalty in cellular networks with digital fixed relays. IEEE GLOBECOM 2004 (Vol. 5, p. 305357), November 2004.

  30. Yu, L., Liu, C., Zhang, S., & Zhou, W. (2012). A new load balancing strategy in relay enhanced cellular networks with multiple traffic types. In: Advances in electric and electronics lecture notes in electrical engineering (Vol. 155). Springer.

  31. Fan, J., Hui, T., Haibo, X., & Xijun, W. (2009). A novel relay based load balancing scheme and performance analysis using markov models. IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (pp. 1–5), April 2009.

  32. Dimitrova, D. C., van den Berg, J. L., & Heijenk, G. (2011). Uplink packet scheduling in cellular networks with relayingcomparative study. Springer Telecommunication Systems Journal, 48(3–4), 237–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Venkatkumar, V., Haustein, T., & Faulkner, M. (2010). Relaying results for indoor coverage in long-term evolution and beyond. European Transactions on Telecommunications, 21(8), 770779, Article first published online : 28 Nov. 2010, doi:10.1002/ett.1450.

  34. Marsan, M. A., Chiaraviglio, L., Ciullo, D., & Meo, M. (2009). Optimal energy savings in cellular access networks. In Proceedings of IEEE ICC Workshop. Dresden, Germany, Jun. 18, 2009, 15 pp.

  35. Marsan, M. A., & Meo, M. (2009). Energy efficient management of two cellular access networks. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMETRICS workshop, Seattle, WA, Jun. 15, 2009, 15 pp.

  36. Zhou, S., Gong, J., Yang, Z., Niu, Z., & Yang, P. (2009). Green mobile access network with dynamic base station energy saving. In Proceedings of ACM MobiCom, Beijing, China, Sep. 20–25, 2009, 13 pp.

  37. Marsan, M. A., Chiaraviglio, L., Ciullo, D., & Meo, M. (2009). Optimal energy savings in cellular access networks. Proceedings of IEEE ICC’09 Workshop, GreenComm, June 2009.

  38. Todd, T. D., Sayegh, A. A., Smadi, M. N., & Zhao, D. (2008). The need for access point power saving in solar powered WLAN mesh networks. IEEE Network, 22(3), 4–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Mathar, R., & Schmeink, M. (2001). Optimal base station positioning and channel assignment for 3G mobile networks by integer programming. Annals of Operations Research, 104, 225236.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Sang, A., Wang, X., Madihian, M., & Gitlin, R. D. (2004). Coordinated load balancing, handoff/cell-site selection and scheduling in multi-cell packet data systems. In: Proc. MobiCom’04 (pp. 302, 314), Sept. 2004.

  41. Bejerano, Y., & Han, S. J. (2009). Cell breathing technique for load balancing in wireless LANs. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 8(6), 735, 749.

  42. Cardei, M., Thai, M. T., & Li, Y. (2005). Energy-efficient target coverage in wireless sensor network. In: Proc. Infocom’05 May 2005.

  43. Dargie, W., Chao, X., & Denko, M. K. (2010). Modelling the energy cost of a fully operational wireless sensor network. Springer Telecommunication Systems Journal, 44(1–2), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Viswanathan, H., & Mukherjee, S. (2005). Performance of cellular networks with relays and centralized scheduling. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 4, 23182328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Saito, M., Haraguchi, S., & Okada, M. (2012). Dual-hop non-regenerative OFDM relay systems with chunk-based power allocation. Springer Wireless Personal Communications, 64(1), 51–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Seo, S. H., & Song, J. S. (2009). An energy-efficient interface selection for multi-mode terminals by utilizing out-of-band paging channels. Springer Telecommunication Systems Journal, 42(1–2), 151–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ramrekha, T. A., Talooki, V. N., Rodriguez, J., & Politis, C. (2012). Energy efficient and scalable routing protocol for extreme emergency ad hoc communications. Mobile Advances: Applications and Energy-Efficient Technologies, 17.

  48. Saghezchi, F., Alam, M., Radwan, A., & Rodriguez, J. (2013). Cooperative strategies for power saving in multi-standard wireless devices. In A. Galis & A. Gavras (Eds.), The future Internet (Vol. 7858, pp. 284–296). Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer.

  49. Hosein, P. (2006). On the optimal scheduling of uplink resources in OFDMA-based wireless networks. In Proceedings of EW 2006–12th European Wireless Conference. Athens, Greece, April 2006.

  50. 3GPP 25.214. (2010-09). Physical layer procedures (FDD) (Release 9). 3GPP TS 25.214 V9.3.0.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received national funding from the Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (PTDC/EEA-TEL/119228/2010 - SMARTVISION) and the FCT/MEC-PIDDAC (E-COOP - PEst-OE/EEI/LA0008/2013).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto de Telecomunicações, Aveiro, 3810-193, Portugal

    Valdemar Monteiro, Kazi Mohammed Saidul Huq, Shahid Mumtaz & Jonathan Rodriguez

  2. School of Comp. and Info. Systems, Kingston University London, Kingston upon Thames, UK

    Valdemar Monteiro & Christos Politis

Authors
  1. Valdemar Monteiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kazi Mohammed Saidul Huq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shahid Mumtaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christos Politis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jonathan Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valdemar Monteiro.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 3GPP network sharing proposed architecture

3GPP has specified in the a Network Sharing architecture in the Release 12 as shown in Figs. 10 and 11, which allows a singular physical UTRAN deployment to be shared between multiple core network (CN) operators, each with their own separate CN infrastructure deployments. Two architectural variations of Network Sharing are defined:

  • MOCN: Multiple Operator Core Network

  • GWCN: Gateway Core Network

Fig. 10
figure 10

MOCN: multiple operator core network

Full size image
Fig. 11
figure 11

GWCN: gateway core network

Full size image

In both architectures, the radio access network is shared. Figure 10 shows reference architecture for network sharing in which also MSCs and SGSNs are shared. This configuration will be referred to as a gateway core network (GWCN) configuration. The UE behavior in both of these configurations shall be the same. No information concerning the configuration of a shared network shall be indicated to the UE. For the evolved packet system (EPS), only the PS domain of the above figures is relevant. For EUTRAN access Figs. 10 and 11 both apply but with the MME replacing the SGSN, the eNodeB replacing the RNC, and the S1 reference point replacing the Iu interface (the Iu interface is an external interface that connects the RNC to the Core Network (CN)). For GERAN access, both GWCN and MOCN are applicable but with the BSC replacing the RNC and the A/Gb-Interfaces replacing the Iu interface.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Monteiro, V., Huq, K.M.S., Mumtaz, S. et al. Energy efficient load balancing for future self-organized shared networks. Telecommun Syst 59, 123–135 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-014-9888-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-014-9888-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation