Quasideterministic millimeterwave channel models in MiWEBA
 First Online:
 Received:
 Accepted:
DOI: 10.1186/s1363801605686
 Cite this article as:
 Weiler, R.J., Peter, M., Keusgen, W. et al. J Wireless Com Network (2016) 2016: 84. doi:10.1186/s1363801605686
 4 Citations
 1.1k Downloads
Abstract
This article introduces a quasideterministic channel model and a link levelfocused channel model, developed with a focus on millimeterwave outdoor access channels. Channel measurements in an open square scenario at 60 GHz are introduced as a basis for the development of the model and its parameterization. The modeling approaches are explained, and their specific area of application is investigated.
Keywords
Millimeterwave Channel model Access Backhaul1 Introduction
The increasing mobile traffic demand has led to the proposition of numerous approaches for the future development of mobile radio networks. One popular proposition for the next generation (socalled 5G) is the usage of previously unused spectrum in the millimeterwave band [1]. Using the spectrum at these high frequencies incurs new challenges, compared to radio systems that operate at frequencies below 6 GHz. The possible applications are in backhaul and fronthaul links on the network side [2] or on the access link. Recent research proves the general feasibility of outdoor access links in the lower millimeterwave band (30–40 GHz) based on path loss evaluations [3]. At the same time, a high spatial selectivity of the channel is observed in this publication.
The higher freespace path loss motivates a design shift from an omnidirectional operation to more spatial focusing, using highgain beamforming antennas and multiple input/multiple output (MIMO) approaches. It will also incur a change in system design, towards a more dense deployment of socalled overlay small cell base stations, which will exist in addition to today’s macrocell deployments. These base stations can then provide very high throughput millimeterwave access links to the user terminals. The small cells themselves will also need backhauling to the core network. This in turn might also be deployed using the millimeterwave bands for interference and bandwidth considerations. For the successful design and development of such systems, a comprehensive channel model that covers the relevant propagation effects is an essential basis.
The millimeterwave band has already been used for fixed outdoor applications with success in the recent years [4]. The main concerns for this kind of applications are the impact of weather conditions (rain, snow, fog) and the availability of an unblocked lineofsight (LOS) on the link quality. As the links are mostly static, simple path loss models are sufficient for these applications.
A large number of channel models have been proposed and used for sub6 GHz wireless communication and different kinds of applications and use cases. A wellknown model for mobile radio networks is, e.g., the WINNER II channel model [5]. It relies on a geometrybased stochastic approach and was designed for frequencies from 2 to 6 GHz with up to 100 MHz bandwidth. Its parameters are determined stochastically, based on statistical distributions extracted from channel measurement data. The model was developed for a wide range of propagation scenarios ranging from indoor office, urban microcell to urban and rural macrocell. Different scenarios are modeled by the same approach but with different parameters. When going to higher carrier frequencies in the millimeterwave band and wider bandwidths, the WINNER II and similar geometrybased stochastic models might not be valid any more.
Recently, the widely used IEEE 802.11 standard for wireless local area communication has been extended to the 60GHz band with the 802.11ad protocol. This standard targets indoor communication. A new channel model was developed for this standard, based on the observation that the wireless channel can be well described with a set of distinct geometrybased propagation paths [6]. Spatial resolved measurements were performed in static indoor environments, showing that raytracinglike propagation paths with up to two reflections dominate the received power [7].
Here, we present the quasideterministic (QD) channel model and the link levelfocused Canal Enregistré de Propagation Déterministe (CEPD) model, which have been developed and used within the MillimeterWave Evolution for Backhaul and Access (MiWEBA) project. The QD model combines a geometrybased approach for a limited number of multipath components and a stochastic approach. In this paper, we show how this channel modeling approach may be applied for specific access use cases (outdoor open square and large indoor area) and further how it can be modified for other environments. This modeling approach was chosen in order to accurately support spatial consistency that would not be possible with a statistical model. New experimental data for an open square scenario measurement are used to improve the modeling methodology described previously in [8, 9]. An extension is given in a form of the CEPD model that can be used to abstract the generic QD model to system level requirements, such as limited bandwidth and impact of antennas.
The development of the channel model was driven by a set of reference use cases and scenarios, defined in the MiWEBA project, whose focus is the investigation of new 5G architectures with millimeterwave technology [10, 11]. These use cases are similar to other 5Grelated investigations, with a focus on millimeterwave frequencies and their limitations. Apart from indoor and backhaul scenarios, emphasis is on outdoor mobile access links of small cell base stations with a typical cell radius of several hundred meters. The work presented in this paper focuses on this kind of links.
Section 2 details the performed outdoor access channel measurements to give an understanding of environment and the observed radio propagation effect. Section 3 then introduces the QD modeling approach. The measurementbased parameterization of the model is given in Section 4. Section 5 explains the link layer focus channel model and links it to the QD model.
2 Open square scenario experimental measurements
The center frequency of the measurement campaign was 60 GHz with a sounding bandwidth of 250 MHz. The antennas used on both sides are commercially available vertical polarized omnidirectional antennas with a gain of 2 dBi. Their radiation pattern is flat in the entire azimuth as well as for elevation angles from −30° to 30°. This allows acquiring omnidirectional power delay profiles without any mechanical steering. The influence on the antenna pattern in elevation is expected to be minimal, as there are no major sources of reflection outside the 60° halfpower opening angle.
The receiver cart is either static or moving at a constant speed of 0.5 m/s, each with a temporal snapshot separation of 800 μs. Due to properties of the measurement system, the maximum number of snapshots per acquisition is ca. 60.000. Tracks requiring longer acquisition are measured in multiple adjacent runs.
Due to the measurement bandwidth and the geometry of LOS and groundreflected propagation, fading can occur on the measured path power [12]. Averaging allows reducing this effect and simplifies measurements, but for the data analysis in the present paper, no averaging is applied, as the focus lies on the multipath properties of the channel detailed investigation.
The analysis of other channel parameters from these and similar urban access measurements, such as path loss and delay spread, was presented in earlier work [13, 14].
3 Quasideterministic channel model
The experimental measurement results in Section 2, represented in the form of timedelay diagrams (Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7), illustrate the fact that the channel for static and moving TxRx positions is not completely random, but has some QD components, that are represented in the timedelay diagrams by steady, clearly visible lines and traces. Moreover, the strongest traces can be identified as LOS path and reflections from the nearest buildings. The same diagram, plotted by using the raytracing reconstruction of the environment, will be very similar to the one seen in the experiments, with difference only in noiselike background and weak short traces that can be caused by small objects. These observations lead to the conclusion that realistic millimeterwave channel models can consist of deterministic components, defined by the scenario and random components, representing unpredictable factors or objects that are random or insignificant.
Such an approach, called QD, was offered for modeling access and backhaul millimeterwave channels at 60 GHz [9, 15]. The approach builds on the representation of the millimeterwave channel impulse response comprised of a few QD strong rays (Drays), a number of relatively weak random rays (Rrays, originating from the static surfaces reflections), and flashing rays (Frays, originating from moving cars, buses, and other dynamic objects reflections).
The key benefit of this approach compared to pure statistical models is its inherent support for spatial consistency. The deterministic part of the channel impulse response accurately takes the position of the transmitter and receiver into account. Simulating a moving user, for example, the bandlimited channel impulse response can accurately reproduce fading effects, observed in real measurements [16]. This is not possible with a purely statistical model.
The first type of rays makes the major contribution into the signal power, is present all the time, and usually can be clearly identified as a reflection from scenarioimportant macro objects. It is logical to include them into the channel model as deterministic (Drays), explicitly calculated values. The element of randomness, important for the statistical channel modeling, may be introduced on the intracluster level, by adding a random exponentially decaying cluster to the main Dray.
The second type of rays (Rrays) is the reflections from the random objects or the objects that is not mandatory in the scenario environment. Such type of rays may be included in the model in a classical statistical way, as rays with parameters (power and delays) selected randomly in accordance with the predefined distributions.
The third type of rays (Frays) may be introduced to the model in the same way as Rrays but with some additional statistic for appearing chance and duration.
For each of the channel propagation scenarios, the strongest propagation paths are determined and associated to rays which produce the substantial part of the received useful signal power. Then, the signal propagation over these paths is calculated based on the geometry of the deployment and the locations of the transmitter and receiver, calculating the ray parameters, such as AoA and AoD, power, and polarization characteristics. The signal power conveyed over each of the rays is calculated in accordance to theoretical formulas taking into account freespace losses, reflections, antenna polarization, and receiver mobility effects like Doppler shift. Some of the parameters in these calculations may be considered as random values like reflection coefficients or as random processes like receiver motion. The number of Drays, which are taken into account, is scenario dependent and is chosen to be in line with the channel measurement results. Additionally to the Drays, a lot of other reflected waves are received from different directions, coming, for example, from cars, trees, lamp posts, benches, and houses (for outdoor scenarios) or from room furniture and other objects (for indoor scenarios). These rays are modeled as Rrays. These rays are defined as random clusters with specified statistical parameters extracted from available experimental data or raytracing modeling.
For a given environmental scenario, the process of the definition of Drays and Rrays and their parameters is based both on experimental measurements and raytracing reconstruction of the environment. The results presented in Section 2 on experimental measurement may serve as a great example of the process. The experimental measurement processing includes peak detection algorithm [15] with further accumulation of the peak statistics over time, identifying the percentage of the selected ray activity during observation period. The rays with activity percentage above 80–90 % are the Drays: strong and always present, if not blocked. The blockage percentage for Drays may be estimated around 2–4 %. The rays with activity percentage about 40–70 % are the Rrays: the reflections from faraway static objects, weaker, and more susceptible to blockage due to longer travel distance. And finally, the rays with activity percentage below 30 % are the Frays: the flashing reflection from random moving objects. Such rays are not “blocked”; they actually “appear” only for a short time.
Scenarios with obstructed lineofsight (OLOS) between the transmitter and receiver antennas, caused by moving or fixed objects (e.g., cars, pedestrians, trees), can be integrated in the model with a stochastic process. Scenarios where the LOS is completely blocked by large objects (e.g., buildings) are often referred to as nonlineofsight (NLOS). These might also be taken into account by the model, by blocking the LOS and ground reflection Dray permanently and by carefully defining the other Drays. Measurements have to be performed to derive meaningful parameters for this case. The measurement campaign described in Section 2 focused on LOS and OLOS scenarios and does not provide information on this. Other measurements performed by the authors however show that a millimeterwave signal can be received in an urban street canyon NLOS scenario, but received signal strength quickly drops with the distance [14].
4 QD channel model development
4.1 Dray modeling
Direct ray parameters
Parameter  Value 

Delay  Direct ray delay is calculated from the model geometry: τ_{D} = d_{D}/c \( {d}_D=\sqrt{L^2+{\left({H}_{tx}{H}_{rx}\right)}^2} \) 
Power  Direct ray power calculated as freespace path loss with oxygen absorption: \( {P}_D=20{ \log}_{10}\left(\frac{\lambda }{4\pi {d}_D}\right){A}_0{d}_D \), in dB 
Channel matrix  \( \mathbf{H}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\hfill {10}^{P_D/20}\hfill & \hfill 0\hfill \\ {}\hfill 0\hfill & \hfill {10}^{P_D/20}\hfill \end{array}\right]{e}^{\frac{j2\pi {d}_D}{\lambda }} \) 
AoD  0° azimuth and elevation 
AoA  0° azimuth and elevation 
Groundreflected ray parameters
Parameter  Value 

Delay  Groundreflected ray delay is calculated from the model geometry: τ_{G} = d_{G}/c \( {d}_G=\sqrt{L^2+{\left({H}_{tx}+{H}_{rx}\right)}^2} \) 
Power  Groundreflected power calculated as freespace path loss with oxygen absorption, with additional reflection loss calculated on the base of the Fresnel equations. Reflection loss R is different for vertical and horizontal polarizations \( {P}_{\perp }=20{ \log}_{10}\left(\frac{\lambda }{4\pi {d}_G}\right){A}_0{d}_G+{R}_{\perp }+F; \) \( {P}_{\parallel }=20{ \log}_{10}\left(\frac{\lambda }{4\pi {d}_G}\right){A}_0{d}_G+{R}_{\parallel }+F \) \( F=\raisebox{1ex}{$80$}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{1ex}{$ \ln 10$}\right.{\left(\pi {\sigma}_h \sin \phi /\lambda \right)}^2 \) \( {R}_{\perp }=20{ \log}_{10}\left(\frac{ \sin \phi \sqrt{B_{\perp }}}{ \sin \phi +\sqrt{B_{\perp }}}\right);\ {R}_{\parallel }=20{ \log}_{10}\left(\frac{ \sin \phi \sqrt{B_{\parallel }}}{ \sin \phi +\sqrt{B_{\parallel }}}\right) \) B_{∥} = ε_{r} − cos^{2}ϕ for horizontal polarization. \( {B}_{\perp }=\left({\varepsilon}_r{ \cos}^2\phi \right)/{\varepsilon}_r^2 \) for vertical polarization, where \( \tan \phi =\frac{H_{tx}+{H}_{rx}}{L} \) and σ_{h} is a surface roughness. 
Channel matrix  \( \mathbf{H}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\hfill {10}^{P_{\perp }/20}\hfill & \hfill \xi \hfill \\ {}\hfill \xi \hfill & \hfill {10}^{P_{\parallel }/20}\hfill \end{array}\right]{e}^{\frac{j2\pi {d}_G}{\lambda }} \) 
AoD  Azimuth: 0°, elevation: \( {\theta}_{AoD}={ \tan}^{1}\left(\frac{L}{H_{tx}{H}_{rx}}\right){ \tan}^{1}\left(\frac{L}{H_{tx}+{H}_{rx}}\right) \) 
AoA  Azimuth: 0°, elevation: \( {\theta}_{AoA}={ \tan}^{1}\left(\frac{H_{tx}+{H}_{rx}}{L}\right){ \tan}^{1}\left(\frac{H_{tx}{H}_{rx}}{L}\right) \) 
Open square model Rray parameters
Parameter  Value 

Number of rays, N  3 
Poisson arrival rate, λ  0.05 ns^{−1} 
Power decay constant, γ  15 ns 
Kfactor  6 dB 
AoA  Elevation: U[−20:20°] 
Azimuth: U[−180:180°]  
AoD  Elevation: U[−20:20°] 
Azimuth: U[−180:180°] 
The feasibility of the proposed approach to the prediction of the signal power is proven in [18] for outdoor microcell environments and in [19] and [20] for intervehicle communication modeling. In general, problems of the signal power prediction are considered in [21].
The Drays are strictly scenario dependent, but in all considered scenarios, two basic Drays are present: the direct LOS ray and the groundreflected ray. The calculation of those two basic rays’ parameters will be the same for all scenarios.
4.1.1 Direct ray
The direct LOS ray is a ray between Tx and Rx.
4.1.2 Ground ray
The groundreflected ray presents in all considered scenarios. Its parameters are calculated based on the Friis freespace path loss equation and the Fresnel equation to take into account reflection and rough surface scattering factor F. Note that the horizontally and vertically polarized components of the transmitted signal will be differently reflected and, thus, the channel matrix should have different diagonal elements.
4.1.3 Additional rays
For the open area scenario, with no significant reflection objects other than ground, only two Drays are considered. However, in more rich scenarios, like the one considered here as the large square, or, for example, street canyon scenario, reflection from one or more walls should be taken into account. The principle of calculation of these additional Drays is the same; detailed description may be found in [15]. The closest wall can be calculated using the geometry and positions of the transmitter and receiver. The calculation of the path properties is equal to the ground ray reflection in the previous section with adapted material parameters.
4.2 Rray modeling
For taking into account a number of rays that cannot be easily described deterministically (reflections from objects that are not fully specified in the scenario, objects with random or unknown placement, objects with complex geometry, higherorder reflections, etc.), the statistical approach is used in the QD channel modeling methodology. The clusters arrive at moments τ_{k} according to the Poisson process and have interarrival times that are exponentially distributed. The cluster amplitudes A(τ_{k}) are independent Rayleigh random variables, and the corresponding phase angles θ_{k} are independent uniform random variables over [0,2π].
Table 3 summarizes the Rray parameters for the open area/large square models. The power delay profile parameters are derived based on the available experimental data and corresponding raytracing simulations. The AoA and AoD ranges illustrate the fact that random reflectors can be found anywhere around the receiver but are limited in height. Uniform distributions are selected for simplicity and can be further enhanced on the base of more extensive measurements.
The values with sign ± are assumed to have a random sign (+1 or −1, for instance), with equal probability, independently from other values. For the cluster rays with the main Rray, the polarization matrix is the same as the Rray.
Flashing rays, or Frays introduced in Section 3, are intended to describe the reflections from fast moving objects like vehicles and are short in duration. Its properties require additional investigations and analyses; thus, the Frays are not included in the considered QD modeling approach application example.
4.3 Intracluster structure modeling
The surface roughness and presence of the various irregular objects on the considered reflecting surfaces and inside them (bricks, windows, borders, manholes, advertisement boards on the walls, etc.) lead to separation the specular reflection ray to a number of additional rays with close delays and angles: a cluster. The intracluster parameters of the channel model were extracted from the indoor models [6, 7], obtained from the measurement data [23]. The intracluster structure is introduced in the QD model in the same way as Rrays: as Poissondistributed in time, exponentially decaying Rayleigh components, dependent on the main ray.
The identification of rays inside of the cluster in the angular domain requires very high angular resolution. The “virtual antenna array” technique where a low directional antenna element is used to perform measurements in multiple positions along the virtual antenna array to form an effective antenna aperture was in the MEDIAN project [24, 25]. These results were processed in [26], deriving the recommendation to model the intracluster angle spread for azimuth and elevation angles for both the transmitter and receiver as independent normally distributed random variables with zero mean and root mean square (RMS) equal to 5°, N(0, 5°).
Open square model intracluster parameters
Parameter  Value 

Intracluster ray Kfactor  6 dB for LOS ray, 4 dB for NLOS 
Power decay time  4.5 ns 
Arrival rate  0.31 ns^{−1} 
Amplitude distribution  Rayleigh 
Number of postcursor rays  4 
5 Link levelfocused channel model
The link levelfocused propagation channel model presented in this section is a multipath propagation model dedicated to link level simulations. The QD model as well as experimental multipath channel impulse response files may be used as inputs of the model for link level assessments generating appropriate channel impulse responses (CIRs) fit with the simulated physical (PHY) layer and the considered propagation scenario. The link levelfocused propagation channel model, also denoted CEPD model, is a multipath propagation model which conjunctly exploits multirate digital filter processing [27] and experimental multipath measurements to generate propagation CIRs h(t, τ) with scalable limited bandwidth and clocking rates. When simulating propagation, resampling is required in accordance with the simulated PHY layer. The model generates link level propagation CIRs using multirate filter processing to resample and filter the measured propagation channel, adapted to the PHY waveform of the system and simulated use cases [28]. Antenna alignment mismatch test cases allow quantized link level degradation assessments, when the antennas are not aligned. Analytical models are derived from an extension of the multislope model [29], describing antenna alignment mismatching effect on multipath channel, using dedicated measurements and CEPD realizations.
The link levelfocused propagation model is fed with dedicated CIR measurements carried out in larger bandwidths than the system bandwidth, involving filtering and lower sampling rate processing to generate the adequate CIR model. This model can be adapted to outdoor millimeterwave overlay networks as well as to indoor deployments. Input files of the model issued from measurements provide the appropriate coefficients of the model attached to the simulated scenario. The candidate input files of the CEPD model result from a statistical analysis of a large amount of deterministic measurements, performed in each considered scenario. These scenarios are split into typical and atypical test cases including different levels of multipath dispersion. A typical test case in a deployment scenario results from CIR input files describing the average and median multipath dispersion of multipath selectivity parameters as the delay spread, the coherence bandwidth, the delay window set to 75 %, and the interval delay set to 6 dB, while atypical cases are representative of severe situations corresponding to 90 % of cumulative distribution function (CDF) of those selectivity parameters.
Assuming the firstorder statistics of selectivity parameters follow a Gaussian distribution, the typical and atypical input files of the model are deduced from the CDFs of firstorder statistic values of those parameters evaluated on N moving experimental points composed each of M static experimental measurement along a transmitterreceiver path. The CDFs of each selectivity parameter average are established for all measurement points and positions. The selected measurement point is selected if the average value of the concerned selectivity parameter is in the range of interval I given by the Gaussian distribution.
In eq. (9), m_{i,j} is the average value of the selectivity parameter j (RMS delay spread, coherence bandwidth, etc.) of the measurement point i among N. X_{j} and s_{j} are the average and standard deviation, respectively, of the average selectivity parameter j evaluated on N points. The selected measurement point, i.e., the CIRs input file of the model, has the first order of selectivity parameter j, m_{i,j}, ranged in the I_{j} interval. The procedure is iterated for all selectivity parameters indexed by integer j in (9), leading to a selection of a restricted number of measurement points.
This section focuses on indoor multicluster modeling using indoor measurements carried out in a house (residential), with a single floor with a maximum transmitter (Tx) to receiver (Rx) distance of 12 m, and in an office environment composed of several furnished desk rooms along a corridor of 20 m.
The channel sounding technique is based on a frequency sweep mode with a total bandwidth set to 1024 MHz using a VNA “AB millimètre 8350” [30]. The VNA equipment presents a dynamic range of 40 dB, and the channel is sampled at a rate of 0.1 Hz. The channel transfer functions (CTFs) of the propagation channel have been measured in a frequency sweep mode with a total frequency bandwidth of 1024 MHz and a frequency sweeping step fixed to 4 MHz, leading to an excess relative delay τ_{max} of 250 ns. For each TxRx configuration, the measured CTF was calibrated using a reference measurement in which the Tx and Rx ports of the sounder were directly cable connected. The corresponding CIRs have been obtained using an inverse Fourier transform combined with a Hanning window in order to reduce the level of secondary lobes in the relative delay domain due to the limited analyzed bandwidth.
CEPD indoor deployment scenario
Scenario  Antenna gain (dBi), TxRx  Link  Deployment scenario  

CM1  8–13  LOS  Antenna alignment  Residential typical home with multiple rooms. The size is comparable to the small office room. 
CM2  8–13  NLOS/OLOS  No antenna alignment  
CM’1  8–24.6  LOS  Antenna mismatch alignment  
CM’2  8–24.6  OLOS  
CM3  8–13  LOS  Office antenna alignment  Office with typical office setup furnished with multiple chairs, desks, computers, and workstations 
CM4  8–13  NLOS/OLOS  No antenna alignment 
CEPD, selectivity parameters
CM1  CM2  CM’1  CM’2  CM3  CM4  

σ_{DS} (ns)  2.36  6.94  9.41  9.41  6.37  7.11 
Bc_{−0.5} (MHz)  114  62.93  88.68  88.68  59.8  59.8 
CEPD antenna alignment model coefficients
OLOS  OLOS  Delay  OLOS  OLOS  

Typical  Atypical  Typical  Atypical  
П1 (dB)  −25  −20.5  τc1  0.98  8.79 
П2 (dB)  −32.7  −28.8  τ’c1  35.19  11.71 
γ_{2} (dB/ns)  1.81  4.86  τc2  43.97  30.27 
λ_{2} (1/ns)  0.42  1.12  τ’c2  55.69  33.2 
γ_{1} (dB/ns)  4.45  0.72  τc3  50.78  
λ1(1/ns)  1.02  0.17  τ’c3  58.59  
d (TxRx)  5.84  7.35 
These analytical models derived from the CEPD realizations are an extension of the multislope model used to quantify antenna alignment mismatch. These models and associated CEPD realizations may be used to evaluate involved degradations on link level performance and highlight benefits of fasttracking beamforming in time variant environments [31].
6 Conclusions
A QD channel model and a link levelfocused model were introduced. The two models follow different approaches. While the QD model gives a full understanding of the spatial channel, it also requires a precise description of the scenario. This spatial resolution, as well as the spatial consistency of the model for moving users, is of key importance for link level design. With the expected shift towards steerable antennas with medium or high gain, the antenna pattern has a much higher influence on the effective channel between the transmitter and receiver. Aspects like initial discovery of millimeterwave base stations and beacon design also heavily depend on the spatial information.
The flexibility of this QD approach allows channel models for access links to be used for scenarios with similar geometries. For example, the “street canyon access mode” can be changed to the “streetlevel backhaul model” by changing the receiver antenna parameters. These models were validated with different measurements in outdoor scenarios. The QD open area channel model was successfully applied to millimeterwave multiuser MIMO (MU MIMO) small cell access link scenario evaluations [32, 33, 34]. Future work remains on some aspects of the model, like the modeling of the flashing rays (Frays) and NLOS scenarios, where further measurement campaigns are necessary.
The CEPD model results from an optimized multirate filtering combined with a statistical analysis of measurements. It allows an extraction of typical (average behavior of the multipath channel related to a measurement campaign) and atypical (severe cases representative of measurement campaign) measurements that are used as inputs of the model to generate model coefficients associated to the targeted scenario. The model is dedicated to link level simulations with multiple underlying technologies and bandwidths. Scenarios covered in the paper consider antenna alignment mismatch where CEPD realizations have been exploited to generate analytical multicluster models derived from the multislope concept. The CEPD model can also use the QD model as an input to the interface with link level simulations. When the link level is not the focus of research, this is a convenient method of abstraction in order to reduce the complexity for larger scale simulations, for example, with multiple users and multiple base stations.
Acknowledgements
The results presented are from the European part of MiWEBA which is a STREPfunded project by the European Union under grant agreement no. 608637 as part of FP7 ICT2013EUJapan [11]. This work was funded with the support from the EU FP7 program, and the results are also publicly available on the project website http://www.miweba.eu.
Furthermore, the authors would like to acknowledge the support of their colleagues, MiWEBA project partners, and the COST IC1004 for their support and fruitful discussions.
Funding information
Funder Name  Grant Number  Funding Note 

Seventh Framework Programme (BE) 

Copyright information
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.