ECC Recommendation

(19)01

Technical toolkit to support the introduction of 5G while

ensuring, in a proportionate way, the use of existing and
planned EESS/SRS receiving earth stations in the 26 GHz
band and the possibility for future deployment of these
earth stations

Approved 8 March 2019

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 2

INTRODUCTION

Compatibility between IMT-2020 and Space Research Service/Earth Exploration-Satellite Service

(SRS/EESS) earth stations operating in the frequency band 25.5-27 GHz can be achieved by
appropariate coordination zone.
Coordination zones within radius of a few km for EESS earth stations and of a few tens of km for SRS
earth stations (less numerous and more remote) have been calculated. The exact coordination zone
shape will have to be calculated on a case-by-case, mainly depending on the terrain profile around the
specific earth station considered and the type of station.
There is a need to define a recommendation describing the methodology to be used by an administration
when calculating these coordination zones. Although this process presents some similarity with the
process described in Appendix 7 of the Radio Regulations [1] to define coordination between FS systems
and SRS/EESS earth stations, this methodology is more complex, since it is not a static worst case
analysis, but a dynamic Time Variable Gain (TVG) analysis.
Given the differences in protection criteria and earth station antenna operations among SRS, Non-
Geostationary Satellite Orbit (NGSO) EESS and GSO EESS, three slightly different methodologies are
described in three separate annexes. In particular, with regard to SRS, the spacecraft trajectory is highly
variable and therefore, in order to cover all cases, the antenna movement is not taken into consideration;
this leads to slightly higher distances. An additional Annex 4 provides a methodology to address the
deployment of IMT-2020 base stations within the coordination zone of EESS earth stations.

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 3

ECC RECOMMENDATION 19(01) OF 8 MARCH 2019 ON A TECHNICAL TOOLKIT TO SUPPORT

THE INTRODUCTION OF 5G WHILE ENSURING, IN A PROPORTIONATE WAY, THE USE OF
EXISTING AND PLANNED EESS/SRS RECEIVING EARTH STATIONS IN THE 26 GHZ BAND AND
THE POSSIBILITY FOR FUTURE DEPLOYMENT OF THESE EARTH STATIONS

“The European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations,

considering

a) that a methodology is needed to calculate the coordination zones around EESS and SRS earth
stations for compatibility with IMT-2020 systems deployed in the frequency band 25.5-27 GHz;
b) that only a consistent application of methodologies in line with those contained in this
recommendation by all administrations would ensure a proper coordination between IMT-2020 and
EESS and SRS earth stations;
c) that the resulting coordination zones will differ for all earth station cases that will be analysed, due to
the specificity of the terrain surrounding each of these earth stations;

recommends

1. that the methodology described in Annex 1 be used to calculate the coordination zone around SRS
earth stations operating in the frequency band 25.5-27 GHz;

2. that the methodology described in Annex 2 be used to calculate the coordination zone around NGSO
EESS earth stations operating in the frequency band 25.5-27 GHz;

3. that the methodology described in Annex 3 be used to calculate the coordination zone around GSO
EESS earth stations operating in the frequency band 25.5-27 GHz;

4. that, when deploying an IMT-2020 base station inside the coordination zone determined by
recommends 2 and 3, administrations should ensure that a minimum propagation loss (Lb) given in
Table 1 is available between the base station and the EESS earth station.”

Table 1: Required propagation losses (Lb) to ensure protection of EESS earth stations
GSO NGSO
Type Azimuth (°)
Lb (dB) Lb (dB)
0
10
137.5+(Ghor+6) 142
20
30
Hotspot hor
40 136+(G +6) 140
(25 dBm TRP in 200 MHz, 64
antenna elements) 50 135+(Ghor+6) 139
60 133+(Ghor+6) 137
70 130+(Ghor+6) 134
80 124+(Ghor+6) 128
90 119+(Ghor+6) 123
Note 1: Those propagation losses have been derived using the methodology in Annex 4. The
corresponding required separation distance should be computed using a relevant propagation model
and considering the terrain, buildings, or clutter available on the path between the base station and the
earth station considered.
Note 2: for TRP higher than 25 dBm/200 MHz, the minimum attenuation should be increased
correspondingly. The BS gain is based on 8x8 antenna with a maximum gain of 23 dBi.
Note 3: Ghor is the EESS antenna gain in the direction of the horizon.
Note 4: The Lb values have been determined for the NGSO case assuming an EESS gain in the direction of

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 4

GSO NGSO
Type Azimuth (°)
Lb (dB) Lb (dB)
the horizon of 15 dBi. Should the EESS antenna gain towards the horizon be higher, the required
propagation loss has to be increased accordingly.

Note:

Please check the Office documentation database https://www.ecodocdb.dk for the up to date position on
the implementation of this and other ECC Recommendations.

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 5

ANNEX 1: METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING THE COORDINATION ZONE AROUND SRS

EARTH STATIONS

A1.1 INTRODUCTION

Although it is recognised that the SRS earth station is most of the time tracking a NGSO spacecraft, and
hence, its gain towards the horizon varies with time, the trajectory of SRS spacecraft varies considerably
from one mission to the other. All types of missions can be envisaged for SRS (near Earth), ranging from
Low Earth Orbits (LEO) to missions around one of the Lagrange points, and including Geostationary
Satellite Orbits (GSO), Highly Elliptical Orbits (HEO) or Lunar missions. Similarly, SRS (deep space)
missions generally target planets in the ecliptic plane, but can stay for an extended period in near earth
orbits, or depart from the ecliptic plane when chasing comets, asteroids or other bodies.

To ensure that the methodology defined here will cover all types of SRS missions, the SRS earth station
antenna is assumed to be pointing towards the azimuth of the IMT-2020 station, at its minimum elevation
angle.

The zone area which is determined through this methodology can be relatively large given the sensitivity
of SRS earth stations, and the impossibility to consider a specific trajectory or orbit for the spacecraft.
Hence, such zones should be considered as coordination zones where IMT-2020 can still be deployed,
after agreement is obtained with the SRS operator.

The methodology used is the Time Variable Gain (TVG) methodology given in RR Appendix 7 [1]. This
methodology would give results like a Monte Carlo analysis, but is much faster and more efficient. In
order to validate it, a comparison with results given by a Monte Carlo analysis has been performed for
some of the points of the contour, using Recommendation ITU-R M.2101 [2], showing that when a BS
was deployed just outside of the contour, the SRS protection criterion was met, and when a BS was
deployed just inside the contour, the SRS protection criterion was exceeded.

Given that the user equipment will operate either indoor or in heavy clutter, the methodology focusses on
the IMT-2020 base station. Since studies have shown that there is little aggregate effect from several
base stations and user equipment near the earth station, the methodology only considers a single base
IMT-2020 base station. When considering the aggregation of multiple BS, distances are not expected to
increase as long as BS antenna panels are not concurrently pointing towards the ES in azimuth.

A1.2 TVG STANDARD METHODOLOGY

The required minimum propagation loss is then given by EQ 1.

𝐿𝐿𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 (𝑝𝑝𝑣𝑣 ) = 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡 + 𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡 (𝑝𝑝𝑛𝑛 ) + 𝐺𝐺𝑟𝑟 − 𝐼𝐼(𝑝𝑝) (EQ 1)

Where:

 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡 is the total transmitting power level (dBW) in the reference bandwidth of a transmitting IMT-2020
base station;
 𝐼𝐼(𝑝𝑝) is the protection threshold (dBW) in the reference bandwidth to be exceeded for no more than
𝑝𝑝% of the time at the input of the antenna of the receiving SRS earth station that may be subject to
interference;
 𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡(𝑝𝑝𝑛𝑛) is the gain towards the horizon of the transmitting antenna (dBi) that is exceeded for 𝑝𝑝𝑛𝑛% of the
time on the azimuth under consideration;
 𝐺𝐺𝑟𝑟 is the gain towards the physical horizon for a given azimuth (dBi) of the victim SRS earth station
antenna;
 (𝑝𝑝𝑣𝑣) is the minimum required propagation loss (dB) for 𝑝𝑝𝑣𝑣% of the time; this loss must be exceeded by
the propagation path loss for all possible 𝑝𝑝𝑣𝑣% values retrieved from the considered gain
complementary cumulative distribution function. 𝑝𝑝𝑣𝑣 is the time percentage that approximates the

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 6

convolution between the variable horizon gain and the propagation mode path loss and is given by
EQ 2.

 100 p / pn for pn ≥ 2 p

pν =  %
 50 for pn < 2 p
 (EQ 2)

The limitation to 50% comes from the propagation model used, Recommendation ITU-R P.452 [3], which
is limited to percentages of time up to 50%.

A1.3 DETERMINATION OF THE IMT-2020 BASE STATION TOTAL POWER

The IMT-2020 base station total power is given by EQ 3.

𝐵𝐵
𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡 = 𝑃𝑃𝑒𝑒 + 10 log(𝑁𝑁) − 𝐿𝐿𝑂𝑂 − 30 + 10log �𝐵𝐵 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 � (EQ 3)
𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼

Where:
 Pe (dBm) is the power per antenna element;
 N is the number of antenna elements;
 LO (dB) is the ohmic losses;
 Bref is the reference bandwidth of the SRS protection criterion (MHz);
 BIMT is the reference bandwidth of the IMT base station (MHz).

As an example, an urban or suburban hotspot 8x8 elements antenna at 26 GHz with an input power of 10
dBm/200 MHz per element and a 3 dB ohmic loss would have a total power of -28 dBW/MHz.

A1.4 DETERMINATION OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE IMT-2020 BS ANTENNA GAIN TOWARDS

THE HORIZON

The base station antenna panel is assumed pointing towards the SRS earth station in azimuth. The
distribution of antenna gain towards the horizon is determined from the distribution of electric azimuth
angles φescan and electrical tilt angles θetilt, as well as the mechanical tilt θmtilt. Those distributions
themselves are given by the distributions of azimuths and distances of the user equipment as seen from
the base station, using the BS and UE antenna heights.

In this ECC Recommendation, the mechanical tilt makes reference to the horizontal plane. As the
antenna panel is always oriented towards the ground this value is negative. The electrical tilt is defined
with reference to the angle perpendicular to the antenna panel where a negative value refers to an
electrical down-tilt.

The following distribution has been derived for a suburban hotspot base station at 6 m height with a -10°
antenna mechanical tilt, and user equipment at 1.5m height. In this case, the azimuth beam pointing φescan
can be simplified to a normal distribution 𝒩𝒩(𝜇𝜇, 𝜎𝜎2) with zero mean 𝜇𝜇 = 0° and 𝜎𝜎 = 30°, capped at -60° and
+60°. The φescan distribution is shown in Figure 1.

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 7

Figure 1: IMT-2020 5G BS (Suburban hotspot) – Azimuth beam pointing distribution

The elevation tilt θtiltTOT = θetilt + θmtilt (see Figure 2) distribution has to be retrieved from the Rayleigh
distribution (𝜎𝜎 = 32m) of the distance between BS and UE.

Figure 2: IMT-2020 5G BS (Suburban hotspot) – Definition of total tilt

The UE distance and θtilt TOT PDFs are shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4, respectively.

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 8

Figure 3: IMT-2020 5G BS (Suburban hotspot) – UE distance from BS PDF

Figure 4: IMT-2020 5G BS (Suburban hotspot) – Total elevation tilt PDF

From these distributions, it is possible to determine the antenna gain distribution towards the victim earth
station, using the antenna pattern from Recommendation ITU-R M.2101 [2]. The pattern for an 8x8
antenna with a 65° element aperture with an antenna gain of 5 dBi and a front to back lobe ratio of 30 dB
is given in Figure 5. The Recommendation ITU-R M.2101 antenna radiation pattern has been capped at -
30 dB (which is the minimum value of the single element radiation pattern of the array).

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 9

Figure 5: IMT-2020 5G BS (Suburban hotspot) – BS antenna pattern at 0° electrical tilt

The distribution has been computed assuming a flat terrain, i.e. horizon 0 deg. This is a worst-case
assumption given that higher horizon angles would provide lower antenna gain values (the antenna is
pointing towards ground). It is given in Figure 6 for 26 GHz. The gain on the X-axis is Gt, and the
percentage on the Y-axis is pn, as described in (EQ 1).

Figure 6: Gain toward the horizon CCDF (IMT-2020 5G BS Suburban hotspot, 24.25-33.40 GHz)

A1.5 DETERMINATION OF THE SRS ANTENNA GAIN GR TOWARDS THE HORIZON

The SRS antenna gain towards the horizon is determined using the minimum pointing elevation angle for
the azimuth considered and the relevant antenna pattern.

The minimum elevation angle for SRS (near-Earth) in the bands 25.5-27 GHz is either 5°, or 1° above the
horizon when the horizon elevation is higher than 4°.

As an example, Figure 7 gives the horizon profile for the NASA SRS earth station in Robledo (Spain). The
elevation angle around 75° azimuth and above 250° is higher than 4°, hence the minimum elevation
angle is 1° above this horizon. Elsewhere, the relevant value would be 5°.

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 10

Figure 7: Horizon profile around Robledo

It should be noted that Recommendation ITU-R P.452 [3] computes the elevation angle for all the points
of the terrain model between the transmitter and the receiver, and then determines the maximum
elevation value as seen from the transmitter side and from the receiver side. In this case, the value
extracted from Recommendation ITU-R P.452 for the receiver side for all the azimuths would directly
permit to generate the horizon profile depicted in Figure 7.

Recommendation ITU-R SA.509 [10] can be used for the antenna pattern in the 25.5-27 GHz band.
Alternatively, the antenna patterns contained in RR Appendices 7 or 8 [1] could also be considered.

Figure 8 provides an example of SRS antenna gain Gr as function of the azimuth around the NASA SRS
earth station in Robledo (Spain).

Figure 8: NASA SRS earth station antenna gain towards the horizon around Robledo

A1.6 DETERMINATION OF THE SRS PROTECTION THRESHOLD AND REFERENCE BANDWIDTH

The SRS protection threshold I is given in Recommendation ITU-R SA.609 [4] for SRS (Near-Earth)
below 30 GHz, as -156 dBW in a reference bandwidth Bref of 1 MHz. The associated percentage of time p

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 11

is either 0.1% for unmanned missions or 0.001% for manned missions. Since most of SRS earth stations
can support both manned and unmanned missions, the value of 0.001% should be used.

Those criteria do not include any apportionment that could be envisaged on a case-by-case basis.

A1.7 DETERMINATION OF THE REQUIRED PROPAGATION LOSS AND ASSOCIATED

PERCENTAGE OF TIME

For each azimuth around the SRS earth station, and each percentage of time pn determined in section
A1.4, the required propagation loss Lreq and associated percentage of time pv should be determined using
equations (1) and (2) respectively.

A1.8 DETERMINATION OF THE COORDINATION CONTOUR

For each of the azimuth around the SRS earth station, each of the distances from the SRS earth station
location, and each of the percentages of time pv determined in section A1.7, the propagation loss should
be determined using an appropriate propagation model such as the one contained in Recommendation
ITU-R P.452-16 [3], considering the terrain elevation surrounding the earth station.

The terrain elevation model can be the 1-arcsec resolution terrain profile data of the Shuttle Radar
Topography Mission (SRTM), however more detailed terrain models, including build area models, may be
used. The terrain profiles can be sampled with an azimuth step of 1° around the earth station of interest
and a distance step of 25 m. The losses can then be computed around the station with an azimuth step of
1 degree and a distance step of 100 m.

For each azimuth and percentage of time pv, the separation distance required is then the maximum
distance at which the propagation loss calculated is just below the required propagation loss Lreq(pv). The
coordination distance to be retained for the azimuth angle considered is the maximum distance obtained
for all values of pv.

The following Figure 9 provides as an example the coordination contour obtained around the ESA station
in Cebreros (Spain) for an 8x8 suburban hotspot base station at 26 GHz.

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 12

Figure 9: Google Earth view of coordination contour and protection level exceedance around
Cebreros

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01Page 13

ANNEX 2: METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING THE COORDINATION ZONE AROUND NGSO

EESS EARTH STATIONS IN THE BAND 25.5-27 GHZ

A2.1 INTRODUCTION

Most of NGSO EESS satellites using this frequency band will be LEO satellites on polar orbits. Other
types of orbits can also be used with different inclinations, however it is not expected that this would
change the results obtained when using this methodology with a particular satellite on an 800 km sun
synchronous orbit, as proposed in Section A2.5.

The methodology used is based on the Time Variable Gain (TVG) methodology given in RR Appendix 7
[1]. However, since both the transmitter and receiver antenna gains are varying, a convolution has to be
made between the distributions of those gains and hence, the methodology has to be slightly revised.
Here again, the methodology has been validated through additional Monte Carlo simulation for some of
the contour points.

Given that the user equipment will operate either indoor or in heavy clutter, the methodology focusses on
the IMT-2020 base station. Since studies have shown that there is little aggregate effect from several
base stations and user equipment near the earth station, the methodology only considered a single IMT-
2020 base station. When considering the aggregate, distances are not expected to increase as long as
BS antenna panels are not concurrently pointing towards the ES in azimuth.

A2.2 TVG MODIFIED METHODOLOGY

A modified version of the Time Variable Gain (TVG) methodology given in RR Appendix 7 [1] has been
used to approximate the convolution of the distributions of the transmitter antenna gain (base station
tracking the UE), the receiver antenna gain (the EESS earth station tracking an EESS satellite on a
typical polar orbit), and the propagation model. (EQ 1) can be rewritten as follows:

(𝑝𝑝𝑣𝑣) = 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡 + 𝐺𝐺t(𝑝𝑝𝑡𝑡) + 𝐺𝐺𝑟𝑟(𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑟) − 𝐼𝐼(𝑝𝑝) – Lc = 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡 + 𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑜𝑡𝑡(𝑝𝑝𝑛𝑛) − 𝐼𝐼(𝑝𝑝) – Lc (EQ 3)

Where:

 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡 is the total transmitting power level (dBW) in the reference bandwidth of a transmitting IMT-2020
base station;
 𝐼𝐼(𝑝𝑝) is the protection threshold (dBW) in the reference bandwidth to be exceeded for no more than
𝑝𝑝% of the time at the input of the antenna of the receiving SRS earth station that may be subject to
interference;
 𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡(𝑝𝑝t) is the gain towards the horizon of the transmitting antenna (dBi) that is exceeded for 𝑝𝑝t% of the
time on the azimuth under consideration;
 𝐺𝐺𝑟𝑟(𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑟) is the gain towards the physical horizon for a given azimuth (dBi) of the victim SRS earth
station antenna that is exceeded for 𝑝𝑝r% of the time on the azimuth under consideration;
 𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑜𝑡𝑡(𝑝𝑝𝑛𝑛) = 𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡(𝑝𝑝𝑡𝑡) + 𝐺𝐺𝑟𝑟(𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑟) is given by the convolution between the transmitting gain distribution 𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡(𝑝𝑝𝑡𝑡)
and the victim Earth station distribution 𝐺𝐺𝑟𝑟(𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑟);
 𝐿𝐿c is the clutter loss (dB) applicable to the IMT-2020 base station specific environment, if any;
 (𝑝𝑝𝑣𝑣) is the minimum required propagation loss (dB) for 𝑝𝑝𝑣𝑣% of the time; this loss must be exceeded by
the propagation path loss for all possible 𝑝𝑝𝑣𝑣% values retrieved from the considered gain
complementary cumulative distribution function. 𝑝𝑝𝑣𝑣 is the time percentage that approximates the
convolution between the variable horizon gain and the propagation mode path loss and is given by
EQ 2.

A2.3 DETERMINATION OF THE IMT-2020 BASE STATION TOTAL POWER

Same as section A1.3.

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 14

A2.4 DETERMINATION OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE IMT-2020 BS ANTENNA GAIN TOWARDS

THE HORIZON

Same as section A1.4.

A2.5 DETERMINATION OF THE EESS ANTENNA GAIN GR TOWARDS THE HORIZON

To determine the EESS earth station antenna gain towards the horizon for each azimuth, it is necessary
to run a simulation whereby an EESS satellite orbit is propagated over a given period.

EESS satellites are generally using sun-synchronous orbits, with altitudes between 400 and 1400 km, a
typical value being 800 km. For a worst case 400 km altitude, the orbit inclination would be 97°. Figure 10
provides a view of such orbit.

Figure 10: EESS satellite orbit

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 15

It is then necessary to determine the visibilities of such satellite from the EESS earth station considered.
The satellite is visible as soon as its elevation angle as seen from the earth station is over 5°. Figure 11
provides as an example a view of the portions of orbits that are visible from Kiruna (Sweden) over 5°
elevation over a 11 days period.

Figure 11: Visibility of the EESS satellite from a given earth station

For each of the time steps where the satellite is in visibility, and each azimuth around the earth station, it
is then necessary to determine the offset angle between the vector earth station-satellite, and the horizon
direction for the azimuth considered. This offset angle can then be used to determine the antenna gain
towards the horizon, using antenna patterns such as RR Appendix 7 or Appendix 8 [1]. The cumulative
distribution function of the antenna gain can then be extracted for each azimuth, as shown in Figure 12
for Kiruna, and an antenna following AP8 with a 70.7 dBi maximum antenna gain.

Figure 12: EESS Antenna gain towards the horizon

This cdf provides on the X-axis the value of Gr and on the Y-axis the value of pr used in equation 3, for
each azimuth.

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 16

A2.6 DETERMINATION OF THE CONVOLUTION GTOT OF BOTH ANTENNA GAINS TOWARDS THE
HORIZON

When both distributions of base station gain towards the horizon and EESS gain towards the horizon are
available, the next step is to convolve them. This can be done directly for each azimuth, or using this
alternative approach:

 Generate N random base station antenna gain values Gt following the distribution 𝐺𝐺t(𝑝𝑝𝑡𝑡) obtained in
section A1.4;
 Generate N random EESS earth station antenna gain values Gr following the distribution
𝐺𝐺𝑟𝑟(𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑟)obtained in section A2.5;
 Sum the two random numbers obtained Gtot=Gt+Gr;
 Generate the cdf of Gtot.

This has been done as an example for the EESS earth station in Kiruna, for all azimuth around the earth
station, in Figure 13.

Figure 13: Composite gain Gtot

A2.7 DETERMINATION OF THE EESS PROTECTION THRESHOLD AND REFERENCE BANDWIDTH

The EESS sharing threshold I is given in Recommendation ITU-R SA.1027 [6]. This Recommendation
proposes two criteria, one long-term and one short-term. Monte Carlo analyses have shown that when
the short-term criterion was met, the long-term was also met. In addition, applying this methodology with
the long-term criterion and a percentage of time of 20% would largely overestimate the separation
distances required to ensure protection to EESS earth stations.

The sharing criterion to be used is therefore the short-term criterion, given as -116 dBW in a reference
bandwidth Bref of 10 MHz. The associated percentage of time p is 0.005%.

A2.8 DETERMINATION OF THE REQUIRED PROPAGATION LOSS AND ASSOCIATED

PERCENTAGE OF TIME

Same as section A1.7.

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 17

A2.9 DETERMINATION OF THE COORDINATION ZONE CONTOUR

For each of the azimuth around the EESS earth station, each of the distances from the EESS earth
station location, and each of the percentages of time pv determined in section A1.8, the propagation loss
should be determined using an appropriate propagation model such as the one contained in
Recommendation ITU-R P.452-16 [3], considering the terrain elevation surrounding the earth station.

The terrain elevation model can be the 1-arcsec resolution terrain profile data of the Shuttle Radar
Topography Mission (SRTM), however more detailed terrain models, including build area models, may be
used. The terrain profiles can be sampled with an azimuth step of 1°around the earth station of interest
and a distance step of 25 m. The losses can then be computed around the station with an azimuth step of
1 degree and a distance step of 100 m.

For each azimuth and percentage of time pv, the separation distance required is then the maximum
distance at which the propagation loss calculated is just below the required propagation loss Lreq(pv). The
separation distance to be retained for the azimuth angle considered is the maximum distance obtained for
all values of pv.

The following Figure 14 provides as an example the coordination zone contour obtained around the ESA
station in Kiruna (Sweden) for an 8x8 suburban hotspot base station at 26 GHz.

Figure 14: Google Earth view of coordination zone contour around Kiruna

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 18

ANNEX 3: METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING THE COORDINATION ZONE AROUND GSO EESS
EARTH STATIONS IN THE BAND 25.25-27.5 GHZ

A3.1 INTRODUCTION

This methodology would apply to EESS satellites performing observations from the GSO orbit such as
meteorological satellites, in the band 25.5-27 GHz.

In this case, the EESS earth station is tracking a given GSO satellite and hence its antenna is not moving.
The TVG methodology given in RR Appendix 7 [1] can therefore be applied as such. This methodology
would give results similar to a Monte Carlo analysis, but is much faster and more efficient. Here again, the
methodology has been validated through additional Monte Carlo simulation for some of the contour points.

Given that the user equipment will operate either indoor or in heavy clutter, the methodology focusses on the
IMT-2020 base station. Since studies have shown that there is little aggregate effect from several base
stations and user equipment near the earth station, the methodology only considered a single base IMT-
2020 base station. When considering the aggregate, distances are not expected to increase as long as BS
antenna panels are not concurrently pointing towards the ES in azimuth.

A3.2 TVG STANDARD METHODOLOGY

See section A1.2.

A3.3 DETERMINATION OF THE IMT-2020 BASE STATION TOTAL POWER

See section A1.3.

A3.4 DETERMINATION OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE IMT-2020 BS ANTENNA GAIN TOWARDS THE
HORIZON

See section A1.4.

A3.5 DETERMINATION OF THE EESS ANTENNA GAIN GR TOWARDS THE HORIZON

In this case, the GSO satellite is fixed at a given longitude on the GSO arc, at round 36000 km altitude. It is
therefore easy to determine only once the vector going from the EESS earth station towards the EESS
satellite. The offset angle between this vector and the horizon direction for each azimuth can also be
determined only once, whereas for a NGSO satellite it had to be determined for each time step.

This offset angle allows to determine the antenna gain of the EESS earth station towards the horizon for the
azimuth considered. Normally, it should be at its maximum value in the azimuth corresponding to the azimuth
where the GSO satellite is.

A3.6 DETERMINATION OF THE EESS PROTECTION THRESHOLD AND REFERENCE BANDWIDTH

The short-term EESS sharing threshold I is given in Recommendation ITU-R SA.1161 [5], as -133 dBW in a
reference bandwidth Bref of 10 MHz. The associated percentage of time p is 0.1%.

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 19

A3.7 DETERMINATION OF THE REQUIRED PROPAGATION LOSS AND ASSOCIATED PERCENTAGE

OF TIME

See section A1.7.

A3.8 DETERMINATION OF THE COORDINATION ZONE CONTOUR

For each of the azimuth around the EESS earth station, each of the distances from the EESS earth station
location, and each of the percentages of time pv determined in section A1.7, the propagation loss should be
determined using an appropriate propagation model such as the one contained in Recommendation ITU-R
P.452-16 [3], considering the terrain elevation surrounding the earth station.

The terrain elevation model can be the 1-arcsec resolution terrain profile data of the Shuttle Radar
Topography Mission (SRTM), however more detailed terrain models, including build area models, may be
used. The terrain profiles can be sampled with an azimuth step of 1° around the earth station of interest and
a distance step of 25 m. The losses can then be computed around the station with an azimuth step of 1
degree and a distance step of 100 m.

For each azimuth and percentage of time pv, the separation distance required is then the maximum distance
at which the propagation loss calculated is just below the required propagation loss Lreq(pv). The separation
distance to be retained for the azimuth angle considered is the maximum distance obtained for all values of
pv.

The following Figure 15 provides as an example the coordination zone contour obtained around the
EUMETSAT earth station in Leuk (Switzerland) for a 8x8 suburban hotspot base station at 26 GHz.

Figure 15: Google Earth view of the coordination zone contour around Leuk

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 20

ANNEX 4: METHODOLOGY TO ENSURE THE PROTECTION OF EESS EARTH STATIONS INSIDE THE
COORDINATION ZONE

A4.1 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the annex is to describe one methodology to ensure the protection of EESS earth stations
(GSO or/and NGSO) from IMT-2020 when the IMT base station is within the coordination area. Outside this
coordination area, no calculation is necessary and the deployment of IMT-2020 could be made without
particular constraint. However, in the coordination area, IMT-2020 could be deployed but some precautions
have to be taken.

Studies have shown that, in the case of EESS protection (GSO or NGSO), the generic TVG (made without
terrain profile), provides distances which can most of the time be approximated as follows:

 For GSO earth station, to distance calculated with the maximum gain of BS towards horizon and a
percentage of 50% in the model described by Recommendation ITU-R P.452 [3];
 For NGSO earth station, to distance calculated with the maximum composite gain (Gtot – sum of EESS
and BS gain) and a percentage of 50% in the model described by Recommendation ITU-R P.452.

The distance found by the TVG is also dependent of the emitted power. The studies show that the previous
conclusion is totally relevant for the e.i.r.p described by WP5D as 48dBm/200 MHz for a 8x8 antenna (25
dBm/200 MHz of power considering 3dB of ohmic losses and 23 dBi of maximum gain) and could be
extended until an e.i.r.p of 70 dBm/200 MHz.

Some other studies, on EESS earth station, developed in ITU-R have shown that meeting short term criteria
(-133 dBW/10 MHz for 0.1% (GSO case) and -116 dBW/10 MHz for 0.005% (NGSO) also implies meeting
the long term criteria. So, for EESS earth station, the studies could only focus on this criterion.

For the case of an EESS Earth station, the coordination distance is, most of the time, limited to line of sight
(LOS). In other words the distance is often close to or below the radio horizon. Under this condition, the
calculated losses provided by Recommendation ITU-R P.452 (50% and LOS conditions) are based on free
space losses and diffraction.

A4.2 PROPAGATION LOSSES

Under LOS condition, as described by Recommendation ITU-R P.452 [3], the ducting and troposcatter
effects do not play a role and the minimum losses are given by free space and diffraction. Free space loss
increases with distance and diffractions are linked to the presence of physical obstacles on the propagation
path, as well as diffraction by round Earth. The diffraction losses increase with the number and the height of
the obstacles.

In an urban environment, with hotspots at 6m, the diffraction by buildings, i.e. clutter contribution, could be
very important. As an example, the curves provided by Recommendation ITU-R P.2108 [7] provide diffraction
losses between 13 and 45 dB in the first 500m. For this distance, the average value is close to 19 dB. This
value is arbitrary and will be used as example in calculation. The used of real terrain profile with building
level is however more accurate. Figure 16 provides an example of the building level that could be used in
simulation.

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 21

Figure 16: Example of Building Levels in the centre of the City of Toulouse

A4.3 AGREGATE EFFECT IN THE EESS EARTH STATION FROM SEVERAL IMT- 2020 BS

The aggregated effect of several base stations can be significant when their emissions are of the same
magnitude of power to the EESS receiver. To obtain this condition in a LOS situation, considering the
previous assumption of calculation (max gain, 50%), the BSs need to have the maximum gain towards the
earth station with almost the same losses on each propagation paths. Hence a small margin on the EESS
protection criteria to account for this aggregation effect could be used.

A4.4 EARTH STATION POINTING ON GEOSTATIONARY ARC

A4.4.1 General rules

As mentioned in the previous section (A4.1), the separation distance in the coordination area between an
earth station pointing towards a GSO satellite and an IMT-2020 base station could be defined considering:

1. The maximum gain of the earth station towards the horizon (Grmax)

2. The maximum gain of the BS towards the horizon (Gtmax)

3. The IMT-2020 power (or TRP with 3dB of ohmic losses) converted in the EESS protection criteria
reference bandwidth (10 MHz) (Pt)

4. The short term criterion of the EESS earth station : -133 dBW/10 MHz (Cr)

5. A margin for aggregation (A)

6. A percentage of time of 50% in Recommendation ITU-R P.452 [3] (note: for simplification,
Recommendation ITU-R P.525 [8] (free space) and Recommendation ITU-R P.526 [9] (diffraction) could
be used).

7. A relevant terrain profile between the earth station and the BS. This terrain profile has to be as precise
as possible by including building/clutter level.

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 22

In a real deployment, the separation distance could be difficult to use. In this situation, in order to define the
position of the BS in regards of the EESS earth station, the best way to proceed is to define the necessary
losses based on the assumptions above. The losses could be calculated as follow:

L = 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡 + 𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 + 𝐺𝐺𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 − 𝐶𝐶𝑟𝑟 + 𝐴𝐴 (EQ 4)

A4.4.2 Minimum attenuation towards the EESS station

The study explores the possibility to use he discrimination angle between the mechanical azimuth of BS and
the azimuth where the EESS earth station is as a factor of compatibility improvement. The following figure
provides the cumulative distribution of the BS antenna gain (hotspot at 6m) towards the horizon for different
BS panel physical azimuth angle. The figure was built considering the distribution of electrical tilt (see
Section A1.4) and a mechanical tilt of -10°. Due to the UE distribution in azimuth (between -60 and 60°) and
distance, the figure shows that a maximum gain between 22.5 to 20 dBi could be found towards the horizon
for azimuth values between 0 to 50°. After this value, the maximum gain towards horizon decreases
considerably and become less than 5dBi when the BS is perpendicular to the receiver.

These results show that the position of BS with regards to the EESS earth station could considerably
improve the compatibility between both services. Table 1 provides the necessary losses considering the
distribution of gain presented in Figure 17 and equation (4) from section A4.4.1. The maximum TRP of the
BS is taken as 25dBm/200 MHz. Considering the reference bandwidth of EESS protection criteria (see
section A1.3), the emitted power represents -18 dBW/(10 MHz). For higher TRP the minimum attenuation
would increase correspondingly. For antenna with lower or higher number of elements the minimum
attenuation would need to be recalculated.

The EESS earth station could point towards different positions on the geostationary arc, but the calculation
shows that the gain towards horizon (Gr) could only vary from -6 to -10 dBi, at least in most European
countries below a given latitude. In order to ensure the protection of the earth station, a value of -6 dB is
chosen.

Table 2 shows that, if an average clutter loss value of 19 dB is used the separation distance between IMT-
2020 and EESS earth station could become less than 1 km if the BS points in direction of the earth station
and less than 100 m if the BS is perpendicular to the earth station.

2
10

1
10

0
10

All Azimuths

Azimuth 0°
Percentage of Time (%)

Azimuth 10°

Azimuth 20°
-1
10 Azimuth 30°

Azimuth 40°

Azimuth 50°

Azimuth 60°

Azimuth 70°

-2 Azimuth 80°
10
Azimuth 90°

-3
10
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25

Gain towards horizon (dBi)

Figure 17: CDF of BS gain toward horizon for different azimuths

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 23

Table 2: Evaluation of necessary losses

Pt Cr Aggr. FS FS+CLUTTER
Azimuth Gt Gr Lb
Type (dBW (dBW effect distance distance (km)
(°) (dBi) (dBi) (dB)
/10MHz) /10MHz) (dB) (km) (1)
0
10
-18 22.5 -6 -133 6 137.5 6.6 0.8
20
30
40 -18 21 -6 -133 6 136 5.8 0.65
Hotspot
50 -18 20 -6 -133 6 135 5.2 0.58
60 -18 18 -6 -133 6 133 4.1 0.47
70 -18 15 -6 -133 6 130 3 0.33
80 -18 9 -6 -133 6 124 1.5 0 .17
90 -18 4 -6 -133 6 119 0.8 <0.1
(1) the distance are evaluated considering an average clutter value of 19 dB (average value of distribution provided by P.2108
[7]for a distance of 500m)

A4.5 EARTH STATION TRACKING A NON-GEOSTATIONARY SATELLITE

A4.5.1 General rules

As shown in section (A4.1), the separation distance in the coordination area between an earth station
pointing towards a NGSO satellite and an IMT-2020 base station could be defined considering:

1. The maximum composite gain (associated gain of BS and earth station) towards horizon (Gcmax)

2. The IMT-2020 power (or TRP with 3dB of ohmic losses) converted in the EESS protection criteria
reference bandwidth (10 MHz) (Pt)

3. The short term criteria of the NGSO EESS earth station : -116 dBW/10 MHz (Cr)

4. A fixed value of Aggregation (A)

5. A percentage of time of 50% in Recommendation ITU-R P.452 [3] that could be often simplified by the
associated use of Recommendation ITU-R P.525 [8] (free space) and Recommendation ITU-R P.526 [9]
(diffraction).

6. A relevant terrain profile between the earth station and the BS. This terrain profile has to be as precise
as possible including building/clutter level.

In real deployment, the separation distance could be difficult to use. In this situation, in order to define the
position of the BS in regards of the EESS earth station, the best way to proceed is to define the necessary
losses based on the assumptions above. The losses could be calculated as follows:

L = 𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡 + 𝐺𝐺𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 − 𝐶𝐶𝑟𝑟 + 𝐴𝐴 (EQ 5)

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 24

A4.5.2 Practical Case

Similarly to the previous section, the study focuses on the possibility to use the discrimination angle between
mechanical axes of BS and EESS earth station as a factor of compatibility improvement. Figure 18 provides
the cumulative distribution of the composite gain (association of the BS gain and EESS gain) towards the
horizon for different azimuth angles. Due to the angle limitation of BS electrical tilt from -60 to 60°, the
maximum composite gain is between 35 and 37.5 dBi for discrimination angle between 0 to 50° and
decreases for angles above.

Table 2 provides the necessary losses considering the distribution of gain presented in Figure 16 and
equation (EQ 4) from section A4.5.2. In this example, the maximum power of the BS is taken as described by
ITU-R WP5D (25 dBm/(200 MHz)). Considering the reference bandwidth of EESS protection criteria (see
section A1.3), the emitted power represents -18 dBW/(10 MHz).

The EESS earth station tracks a non-geostationary satellite at 800 km of altitude in polar orbit. The minimum
elevation angle is taken as 5°. For this elevation, the maximum antenna gain towards horizon, using RR
appendix 8 is closed to 15 dBi.

Table 3 shows that, if an average value of clutter loss of 19 dB is used the separation distance between IMT-
2020 and the EESS earth station could become less than 1.3 km if the BS points in direction of the earth
station and less than 140 m if the BS is perpendicular to the earth station.

Figure 19 provides the map of losses in a city where the EESS earth station could be deployed in France.
This figure shows that the maximum distance in the city, where no building is present, is close to 3 km to
obtain 142 dB of losses. When buildings are present in the path, the distance can decrease to a few hundred
meters. However, care has to be taken far away (around 5 km) from the station on height elevation position
(hills, mountains…) as shown in the North East and South West directions of the station. Figure 16 shows
that the diffraction losses due to the presence of buildings on the propagation path would ensure the EESS
earth station protection without imposing undue constraint to IMT-2020.

2
10

1
10

0
10

Azimuth 0°

-1 Azimuth 10°
10
Azimuth 20°

Azimuth 30°
Percentage of time (%)

Azimuth 40°

-2 Azimuth50°
10
Azimuth 60°

Azimuth 70°

Azimuth 80°
-3
10 Azimuth 90°

-4
10

-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40

Composite gain (EESS/BS) (dBi)

Figure 18: CDF of Composite gain toward horizon for different azimuth

Edition 8 March 2019

 ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 25

Table 3: Evaluation of necessary losses

Pt Cr Aggr. FS FS+CLUTTER
Azimuth Gc Lb
Type (dBW (dBW effect distance distance (km)
(°) (dBi) (dB)
/10MHz) /10MHz) (dB) (km) (1)
0
10
-18 38 -116 6 142 11.6 1.3
20
30
40 -18 36 -116 6 140 9.2 1.03
Hotspot
50 -18 35 -116 6 139 8.3 0.92
60 -18 33 -116 6 137 6.6 0.73
70 -18 30 -116 6 134 4.6 0.52
80 -18 24 -116 6 128 2.3 0.26
90 -18 19 -116 6 123 1.3 0.14
(1) the distance are evaluated considering an average clutter value of 19 dB (average value of distribution provided
by P.2108 for a distance of 500m)

Figure 19: Loss Map of the city of Toulouse using Recommendation ITU-R P.452-14 [3] (50%) and real
terrain profile associated with building model

Edition 8 March 2019

ECC/REC/(19)01 Page 26

ANNEX 5: LIST OF REFERENCES

[1] ITU Radio Regulations Edition of 2016

[2] Recommendation ITU-R M.2101-0: “Modelling and simulation of IMT networks and systems for use in
sharing and compatibility studies”
[3] Recommendation ITU-R P.452: “Prediction procedure for the evaluation of interference between stations
on the surface of the Earth at frequencies above about 0.1 GHz”
[4] Recommendation ITU-R SA.609-2: “Protection criteria for radiocommunication links for manned and
unmanned near-Earth research satellites”
[5] Recommendation ITU-R SA.1161-2: “Sharing and coordination criteria for data dissemination and direct
data readout systems in the Earth exploration-satellite and meteorological-satellite services using
satellites in geostationary orbit”
[6] Recommendation ITU-R SA.1027-5: “Sharing criteria for space-to-Earth data transmission systems in
the Earth exploration-satellite and meteorological-satellite services using satellites in low-Earth orbit”
[7] Recommendation ITU-R P.2108-0: “Prediction of Clutter Loss”
[8] Recommendation ITU-R P.525-3: “Calculation of free-space attenuation”
[9] Recommendation ITU-R P.526-14: “Propagation by diffraction”
[10] Recommendation ITU-R SA.509-3: “Space research earth station and radio astronomy reference
antenna radiation pattern for use in interference calculations, including coordination procedures, for
frequencies less than 30 GHz”

Edition 8 March 2019