Deploying Dynamic On-Board Signal Processing Schemes for Multibeam Satellite Systems

Abstract

This paper designs dynamic on-board signal processing schemes in a multiple gateway multibeam satellite system where full frequency reuse pattern is considered among the beams and feeds. In particular, we deploy on-board Joint Precoding, Feed selection and Signal switching mechanism (JPFS) so that the following advantages are realized, I) No need of Channel State Information (CSI) exchange among the gateways and satellite, since the performance of precoding is highly sensitive to the quality of CSI, II) In case one gateway fails, rerouting signals through other gateways can be applied without any extra signal processing, III) Properly selecting on-board feed/s to serve each user which generates maximum gain toward corresponding user, IV) Flexibly switching the signals received from the gateways to requested users where each user can dynamically request traffic from any gateway, and V) Multiple user with multiple traffic streams can be dynamically served at each beam. However, deploying such JPFS architecture imposes high complexity to the satellite payload. To tackle this issue, this study aims at deploying JPFS that can provide affordable complexity at the payload. In addition, while increasing the data demand imposes extensive bandwidth resources requirement in the feeder link, the proposed JPFS design works efficiently with available feeder link resources even if the data demand increases. The proposed design is evaluated with a close-to-real beam pattern and the latest broadband communication standard for satellite communications.

Satellite Communications in the New Space Era: A Survey and Future Challenges

“…Introducing precoding techniques, the functionalities of the PHY, MAC and NET layers become even more intertwined. The main reason is that the achieved user rates at PHY are dependent on the packet scheduling due to the non-orthogonal access of the medium [125], [197]- [200]. The works in [125], [197], [198], assume that the number of users to be grouped into the same frame is fixed and constant across the beams.…”

“…The main reason is that the achieved user rates at PHY are dependent on the packet scheduling due to the non-orthogonal access of the medium [125], [197]- [200]. The works in [125], [197], [198], assume that the number of users to be grouped into the same frame is fixed and constant across the beams. In addition, [125], [197], [198] follow a two-step approach where first a single user is classified in each group, and next the rest of the users are classified.…”

Joint Scheduling and Precoding for Frame-Based Multigroup Multicasting in Satellite Communications

“…The authors in [6] proposed a heuristic user scheduling and extended the precoding framework in [5] to SRM under PBPC for frame-based MGMC. Noticing the complexity of the algorithms in [5] and [6], the authors in [7] propose a heuristic two-stage low-complexity solution where the precoder design for inter-beam is followed by the precoder design for intra-beam interference. User scheduling is not addressed [5], [7] and the proposed user scheduling in [6] is heuristic.…”

“…Noticing the complexity of the algorithms in [5] and [6], the authors in [7] propose a heuristic two-stage low-complexity solution where the precoder design for inter-beam is followed by the precoder design for intra-beam interference. User scheduling is not addressed [5], [7] and the proposed user scheduling in [6] is heuristic. The precoding solutions proposed in [5], [7] and [6] for SRM problem are heuristic without any guarantees on performance.…”

“…User scheduling is not addressed [5], [7] and the proposed user scheduling in [6] is heuristic. The precoding solutions proposed in [5], [7] and [6] for SRM problem are heuristic without any guarantees on performance. Moreover, as mentioned previously, the SRM problem entails a joint design of scheduling and precoding.…”