- This topic has 76 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 8 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
ALU,
good to know, and now we just need to find out at which B10 edition the problem was fixed… and perhaps, what was the problem initially…
my email is pix_erlang (at) yahoo dot com
try again, it should work.
regards
pixDear all,
After seaching on high HO due to DL interference, I found this disscussion very interesting. We are having the same problem in our network.
we have tried BCCH re-planning,even tunning from hopping to fix frequencies but with no results 🙁
Maybe we have incompatibility of DTX and AMR as disscused,,, we have these features activated.
If anyone has find a solution of high HO due to DL interference,,, please share it with us.
thanks
hi,
you should try a quick fix, for few hours. If you see an improvement, then it means that the problem comes from DTX/AMR.
Otherwise, just put it back on.
Here is what you can try : disable DTX for AMR calls.regards
pixHi pix,
we have disabled DTX but there were no effect in the network (only HO due to UL interference were increased a little bit, but this is normal, I suppose, without DTX).
Maybe I will check AMR parameters!!! They are set default value but I dont know what could be the problem in this moment,,, any suggestion is welcomed 🙂
thanks
.bjushka.hi,
good results are reported only after ARM deactivation,,, so HO due to DL interference are decreased only after AMR deactivation,,, how can this be possible???
anyone can explain???
BR
We had the same problem with AMR in B10.
Need to deactivate DTX_UL for AMR and then it should work. (DtxUplinkAMR=false, DtxUplinkAMR_HR=false)
One question, if you are doing some hopping, Deactivate Intracell (all intracell, EN_INTRA_DL_AMR=EN_INTRA_UL_AMR=EN_INTRA_DL=EN_INTRA_UL=false), there is no sense using it in a hopping mode, it might trigger useless HO.
BR
Ianhi,
we did deactivate DTX but it didnt effect at all.
yes, we are using frequency hopping.
I have one question:
about intra cell HO, you think isn’t compatible with AMR or with frequency hopping, can you please explain,,, I dont understand.Thanks
bjushka
Hi bjushka,
IntraCell HO didn’t succeed with frequency hopping in our network. So we disabled it and after that it was Ok, HO failures and Incomming HO congestion were decreased. IntraCell HO is suitable with No Hopping. I think it’s better to disable IntraCell HO as HI said and keep them AMR, DTX and Frequency Hopping, you’ll see improvements.
Regards,
Rexhi rex,
we have deactivated today only intra cell HO for interference, and the result is HO due to DL interference decreased to 0% is noticed(this is good but to good to be true! )
What bother me is that we can have internal interference in our network or just that intra cell HO for interference cause problems to AMR feature or to frequency hopping feature, normal functioning?Do you have any explanation?
Improvement is good thing but as long as I dont know what have caused this problem I am not sure that deactivating HO intracell is a good thing to do,,, please help
thanks for the help
.bjushka.
Hi bjushka,
This is completely normal, when the mobile is hopping, there is no sense doing Intracell HO as TRXs are all hopping.
So deactivating Intracell when Hopping is completely normal.
Hope you solved your pbs.
BR
Ianhi Ian,
we have deactivated intracell Ho interference and the problem seems to be solved.
Anyway, not all kind of intracell HO are needed to be deactivated, i think!
In my case the quality is improved and the HO due to DL interference are decreased only after deactivating intracell HO interference UL/DL, but the cells are having intracell attempts for other causes different from interference.Am I right?
Thanks for the help
.bjushka.
hi,
just for info :
in alu, the parameter intracell_ho is used to activate only the interference handovers (cause 15/16). Other intracell ho, such as AMR, TFO, inter zone or cause 30, are not impacted by this parameter.cheers
pixHi,
Thanks Pix 🙂
do you have any comment regarding the deactivation of intracell HO interference, in my case, do you think that intracell HO is not needed when SFH is used in a network?
thanks
.bjushka.
well, i personally don’t like it because in sfh, the interference HO could be useful ONCE. The system could TRY to move the MS to a better trx (the BCCH trx, ie). But if the MS still suffers interference, then the BSS should send the MS to another cell. So only one interference HO per MS… that would be god. But with ALU, the MS will be stuck in a loop, jumping from trx to trx, without any chance of changing cell.
Therefore it is better to deactivate it when in BBH or SFH systems. Even in NH, it is questionnable to use it…
Just my opinion,
pix
Hi bjushka,
Did you activate the DL Pwr control, it might help you as well.
We are now testing it on a cluster and it helped us to reduce interferences.
By the way, are u using SFH 1*1 or 1*3 ?
BR
Ian
