Evaluation of 5G Coexistence and Interference Signals in the C-Band Satellite Earth Station

Abstract

Satellite Services (FSS) used to be alone at the C-Band spectrum in most countries. Since the deployment of 5G in many countries (i.e., 3.3 -3.6GHz), FSS is not the exclusive system in the C-Band anymore. In order to minimize the detrimental interference for the FSS to allowable levels, regional exclusion zones of maximum radiated power in 5G base stations (BS) are proposed and evaluated.ixed Satellite Services (FSS) used to be alone at the C-Band spectrum in most countries. Since the deployment of 5G in many countries (i.e., 3.3 -3.6GHz), FSS is not the exclusive system in the C-Band anymore. In order to minimize the detrimental interference for the FSS to allowable levels, regional exclusion zones of maximum radiated power in 5G base stations (BS) are proposed and evaluated.F In this paper, a measurement campaign has been carried out, and an analysis of the interference has been studied. A filtering model, namely Filter to Remove Broadband Interference 5G (FIREBRING), is proposed and analyzed concerning the carrier-to-noise ratio (C/N). Moreover, this paper focuses on the evaluation of the 5G interference into the FSS. The proposed solution deployed an Low-Noise Block (LNB) with a band frequency of 3.7 to 4.2GHz to test the satellite down-conversion signal at the receiver. The paper offered a complete analysis of the 5G signal, taking into account the implications of out-of-band emissions, potentially LNB saturation into FSS receiver, and the repercussions of the deployment of the 5G BS active antenna systems. With the LNB and down-converter in place, it can be found that the signal interference between 1.450GHz and 1.550GHz, is nearly 18dB.

A PDMS pocket based transparent polydopamine-decorated polypyrrole nanofibril–polyacrylamide hydrogel for EMI shielding applications

“…However, we choose the frequency range 14.5–20 GHz, as the wavelength of this frequency range is very low (mostly 16–25 mm), and therefore the size of antenna is decreased, which is beneficial for communication and broadcasting satellites. 38 Terrestrial interference is absent in this frequency range. 39 Thus, combination of water, PPy–PDA and PPy resulted in polarisation loss, multiple reflections and scattering of the incident EMWs, as well as interfacial polarisation resulting from the presence of various interfaces, leading to an absorption dominated EMI shielding mechanism of the developed hybrid hydrogel.…”

Mobile networks expanding to space: Overview of the seranis beyond 5G testbed

“…As discussed in the introduction, an example of this is the allocation of the 3.3 -4.2 GHz band, which is commonly used for satellite communications, to 5G NR [16]. Various studies raised concerns regarding the interference at SGSs [17,18,19,20,21,60]. In a previous work, we focused on the cancellation of the SSBs of 5G as the irst step.…”

“…Further research [18], [19] indicated that to avoid signi icant interference, a separation of over 15 km between the BSs and the SGSs is necessary. Authors in [20] and [21] demonstrated that even interference from adjacent band 5G signals can disrupt satellite services. Deploying a 5G NPN around our existing SGS will allow us to investigate the impact of the 5G to SGS interference and vice versa.…”

Evaluation of 5G and Fixed-Satellite Service Earth Station (FSS-ES) Downlink Interference Based on Artificial Neural Network Learning Models (ANN-LMS)

“…Therefore, we established the coexistence of 5G-BS and FSS-ES with 85 m distance as an interference source. Several studies, such as [11,12], have mentioned that C-band communications are seriously affected. Therefore, we installed filters on FSS-ES to determine if the interference coexistence of 5G-BS and FSS-ES affected the performance, and we addressed the interference coexistence.…”