Interference in Cellular Satellite Systems

QoE-Aware Cost-Minimizing Bandwidth Renting for Satellite-as-a-Service enabled Multiple-Beam SATCOM Systems

“…In this section, we first show the running time and convergence of the proposed algorithm, then we investigate the effect of varying parameters, namely Q, p, 𝑄 max , pQoE , and 𝐾, on the optimal allocated bandwidth and total renting cost to meet the time-varying demand. Assuming both polarizations are used in all beams, we can put a minimum of 3 adjacent beams per cluster to avoid cross-beam interference [43]. Hence, our numerical results are on 𝐽 = 3 adjacent beams clustering for footprint arrangement as described in Fig.…”

Cognitive beamhopping for spectral coexistence of multibeam satellites

“…However, because of recent progress in the spot beam technologies, it is feasible to create smaller coverage cells having less than 0.5° diameter as mentioned in Section 3.1. Furthermore, it is also possible to divide one spot beam into many sub‐beams with the reduction in peak antenna gain, hence resulting in smaller antenna aperture, while maintaining the edge gain requirements . Besides these possibilities, there still exist challenges to design low complexity antenna structures for multiple spot beams. Because the secondary system employs smaller beams in comparison to the primary system, faster handover is needed for serving mobile users. If the secondary system can use significantly smaller beams, the coexistence of the two multibeam systems can be related to the case of a new generation system being deployed on top of existing legacy systems.…”

“…However, because of recent progress in the spot beam technologies, it is feasible to create smaller coverage cells having less than 0.5° diameter as mentioned in Section 3.1. Furthermore, it is also possible to divide one spot beam into many sub‐beams with the reduction in peak antenna gain, hence resulting in smaller antenna aperture, while maintaining the edge gain requirements . Besides these possibilities, there still exist challenges to design low complexity antenna structures for multiple spot beams.…”

“…As noted in , although both the SFPB and MFPB architectures are comparable in terms of the cost and mass, the MFPB architecture is preferable for smaller satellites due to the requirement of only two reflectors, one for transmission and the another for reception . Furthermore, it is possible to design the secondary link to have low signal to noise ratio (SNR) at the center of the beam (in comparison to the receive SNR at the primary beam center) due to smaller coverage areas of the secondary beams while meeting the same edge requirements . Moreover, partitioning a beam into many sub‐beams performs well toward the spot beam edge meeting the edge gain requirements.…”

Demand-Driven Beam Densification in Multi-Beam Satellite Communication Systems

“…R EUSING the spectral resources across sufficiently separated geographical areas has been considered as the baseline design to ensure high spectral efficiency in broadband multi-beam GEO satellite communication systems [1], [2]. Conventional GEO satellite beam-pattern considers a regular spot-beam grid over the targeted coverage area where the so-called 4-color frequency reuse is applied [3], [4]. In other words, satellite communications systems allow using two polarizations concurrently and hence the overall available spectrum is divided into 2 orthogonal blocks and each block is used either with one or the other of orthogonal polarizations, resulting in 4 non-interfering frequency resources.…”