Comparison of Performance of Packet Scheduling Algorithms in LTE-A HetNets
- 181 Downloads
The concept of usage of heterogeneous networks (HetNets) is about improving the LTE system performance by increasing the capacity and coverage of the Macro cell. In this paper, a performance comparison of various packet scheduling algorithms such as Proportional Fair, Maximum Largest Weighted Delay First and Exponential/Proportional Fair is studied in detail in the HetNets environment. The key performance indicators such as throughput, packet loss ratio, delay and fairness are considered to judge the performance of the scheduling algorithms. Various strategies such as increasing the number of Pico cells in the cell edge were used in the simulation for the performance evaluation study. The results achieved through various simulations show that adding Pico cells to the existing Macros enhances the overall system performance in addition to the various scheduling algorithms implemented in Macros. For reader’s convenience, various types of graphs have been used to represent the simulation results to better understand the performance metrics of various scheduling algorithms. Simulation results shows that overall system gain has increased because of adding Picos and thereby providing better coverage in the cell edge areas and thereby increasing the capacity of the network to provide better quality of service.
KeywordsLTE and LTE-A HetNets Macro Pico Femto Packet scheduling algorithms
- 3.Hu, R. Q., & Qian, Y. (2013). Comparison femto cell and pico cell key features. In: Heterogeneous cellular networks (2nd ed.). IEEE Press, Wiley.Google Scholar
- 5.Liu,B., Tian, H. & Xu, L. (2013) An efficient downlink packet scheduling algorithm for real time traffics in LTE systems. Consumer communications and networking conference (CCNC), 2013 IEEE (pp. 364–369).Google Scholar
- 6.Jalali, A., Padovani, R., & Pankaj, R. (2000). Data throughput of CDMA-HDR a high efficiency-high data rate personal communication wireless system. IEEE 51st, Vehicular technology conference proceedings, 2000. VTC 2000, (pp. 1854–1858). Tokyo: Spring.Google Scholar
- 9.Zyren, J., & McCoy, W. (2007). Overview of the 3GPP long term evolution physical layer. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., white paper. http://www.freescale.com/files/wireless_comm/doc/white_paper/3GPPEVOLUTIONWP.pdf. Accessed 25 Sept 2014.
- 10.Basukala, R., Mohd Ramli, H.A., & Sandrasegaran, K. (2009). Performance analysis of EXP/PF and M-LWDF in downlink 3GPP LTE system. In: IEEE Conference 3-5 Nov. 2009. Kathmandu, Nepal.Google Scholar
- 12.Alfayly, A., Mkwawa, I.-H., Sun, L., & Ifeachor, E. (2012) QoE-based performance evaluation of scheduling algorithms over LTE. Globecom workshops (GC Wkshps), 2012 IEEE (pp. 1362–1366).Google Scholar
- 14.Iturralde, M., Yahiya, T. A., Wei, A., & Beylot, A. (2011). Resource allocation using shapley value in LTE networks. 2011 IEEE 22nd international symposium on Personal Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC) (pp. 31–35).Google Scholar
- 15.Jain, R., Chiu, D.-M., & Hawe, W. R. (1984). A quantitative measure of fairness and discrimination for resource allocation in shared computer system. Hudson: Eastern Research Laboratory, Digital Equipment Corporation.Google Scholar
- 16.Ramli, H. A. M., Basukala, R., Sandrasegaran, K., & Patachaianand, R. (2009) Performance of well known packet scheduling algorithms in the downlink 3GPP LTE system. 2009 IEEE 9th Malaysia international conference on communications (MICC) (pp. 815–820).Google Scholar
- 17.AL-Jaradat, H. (2013). On the performance of PF, MLWDF and EXP/PF algorithms in LTE. CIR World. International Journal of Computers & Technology, 8(1), 698–706.Google Scholar