4.7 Article

Statistical Characterization of 300-GHz Propagation on a Desktop

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY
Volume 64, Issue 8, Pages 3330-3338

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TVT.2014.2358191

Keywords

Channel sounding; indoor channels; statistical characterization; terahertz (THz) channels

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper presents measurements and statistical characterization of 300- to 320-GHz desktop channels. The measurements are performed in line-of-sight (LoS) and non-LoS (NLoS) environments. From the large set of LoS measured data, the parameters for the single-slope path-loss model with shadowing are devised. The results show that the path-loss exponent is around 1.9 and that the variations due to shadowing are similar across different frequencies and different bandwidths. Furthermore, the impact of different materials on the path loss is studied in the NLoS environment. The results show that metal objects in the propagation path cause multiple strong reflections, leading to a higher path loss. Furthermore, the statistical analysis of multipath propagation is performed. The root-mean-square (RMS) delay spread, the mean excess delay, the maximum excess delay, and the coherence bandwidth for LoS and NLoS environments are calculated. The results show that the mean excess delay and RMS delay spread increase with distance and that the RMS delay spread in the desktop terahertz channel is much smaller than that in typical indoor ultrawideband channels. In addition, the power delay profiles for LoS and NLoS environments are analyzed. The results show that strong reflections from the transmitter and receiver electronics are present in both LoS and NLoS environments. Finally, the statistical analysis of the measured signal amplitude in LoS and NLoS environments is performed. For both LoS and NLoS propagation environments, it is found that the lognormal distribution provides the best fit.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available