2008 IEEE 68th Vehicular Technology Conference 2008
DOI: 10.1109/vetecf.2008.66
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Outdoor-Indoor Propagation Measurements and Link Performance in the VHF/UHF Bands

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Previously reported VHF and UHF RMS delay spreads have been observed to be typically in ranges of 100 ns to 2 µs at distances of up to 2 km in various urban settings [12], [13], [14], [15] though occasionally reaching 5 µs when indoor-outdoor transitions are included [16]. In contrast, the delay spreads in mountainous regions at VHF have achieved 8 µs [13] to 30 µs [17].…”
Section: Vhf / Uhf Propagation and Iot Use Casesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previously reported VHF and UHF RMS delay spreads have been observed to be typically in ranges of 100 ns to 2 µs at distances of up to 2 km in various urban settings [12], [13], [14], [15] though occasionally reaching 5 µs when indoor-outdoor transitions are included [16]. In contrast, the delay spreads in mountainous regions at VHF have achieved 8 µs [13] to 30 µs [17].…”
Section: Vhf / Uhf Propagation and Iot Use Casesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[2,3]), recently including short range applications [4]. RMS delay spreads in the VHF and UHF bands have been observed to be typically in ranges of 100ns to 2µs at distances of up to 2km in various urban settings [5,6,7] though occasionally reaching 5µs when indoor-outdoor transitions are included [8]. VHF delay spreads in mountainous regions have been seen to reach 8µs [6] to 30µs [9].…”
Section: Vhf / Uhf Propagation and Iot Use-casesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The parameters we used in the rest of this work are detailed in Table I. We note that these values are common in literature, and assumed as realistic by several works [5] [15], and the technical group on 802.11n [13], and show the better obstacle penetration lower frequencies have, compared to the upper bands.…”
Section: A Pathloss and Shadowingmentioning
confidence: 99%