MULTIPLE ACCESS

INTERFERENCE CANCELLATION
IN AN OVERLOADED CDMA
SYSTEM

PROJECT GUIDE:
Mr G.Vairavel

71806106042 - Muthusathiyapriya.B
71806106047 - Nithia .D
71806106304 - Naghamanickam .N.J
 ABSTRACT
 CDMA- To accommodate more number of users.

 Overloading - to extend capacity limitation of multiple access

techniques.

 Two sets of orthogonal signal waveforms.

 MAI- Inability to maintain complete orthogonality.

 MAI CANCELLATION – using Weighted Linear Parallel

Interference Canceller.

 BER Performance comparison of WLPIC with CLPIC and MF

Detector.
 INTRODUCTION

 FDMA – splitted into frequency bands and allocated

to each user.

 TDMA- full spectral occupancy but only for short

duration of time.

 CDMA- unique digital codes are used to differentiate

subscribers.
 DRAWBACKS OF TDMA AND
FDMA

 Only one subscriber at a time.

 Voice data –burst- takes much time.

 Limits the capacity.

 ADVANTAGES OF CDMA

 No hard handoff
 No guard time
 Less fading
 Greater capacity
 No equalizer needed
 Improved security and privacy
 Fewer dropped calls
 PROCESSING GAIN

 Processing gain - ratio of the spreading

rate to the information rate.

 Expressed in decibels (dB).

 PSEUDO SEQUENCES
 Noise like pseudo-random codes.
 Identification codes - balanced not to correlate to other
codes of itself.
 The most commonly used sequences
1. Maximal length sequences
2. Gold codes
3. Walsh codes
4. Hadamard codes
 Gold codes- better correlation property, more number of
codes can be generated.
 NEAR FAR EFFECT

 Users close to the base station – stronger signal.

 Cross correlation between 2 PN codes is not

zero.

 To combat this effect - Power control.

 SCRAMBLING
 To split the interference power evenly
over the in-phase and quadrature
components.
 Two types
1.Periodic scrambling
2.Complex scrambling
 MULTIPLE ACCESS
INTERFERENCE
CANCELLATION
 The most common interferences
1. Multiple Access Interference (MAI)
2. Inter Modulation Interference (IMI)

 Inter Modulation Interference - undesired combining

of several signals.

 MAI- inability to maintain complete orthogonality

 Cancellation of MAI is done.

 Using MATLAB 7.0.1.

CANCELLATION METHODS

1. Successive Interference Canceller

2. Parallel Interference Canceller

SUCCESSIVE INTERFERENCE
CANCELLER
 Order of subtractions given by the relative
strength of the users.

 Ranking the signal strengths.

 Strongest signal is cancelled out first.

 PARALLEL INTERFERENCE
CANCELLER
 Allthe Interferences are cancelled parallely.
 Block diagram of PIC
 CANCELLATION METHODS
USING PIC
 Matched Filter Detector
 Conventional LPIC
 Weighted LPIC

Cancellation of MAI is done using

WLPIC and it’s performance is compared
with MF detector and CLPIC.
MATCHED FILTER DETECTOR
 MF- detect each user in parallel .
 The MF output of Kth user is given by

where A is the amplitude

b is the bit transmitted
ρ is the cross correlation coefficient
 MAI CANCELLATION USING
CLPIC
 Optimum weight is 1 for all the users.
 Estimate of MAI is subtracted from the received signal.
 The mth stage output of CLPIC is given by

Where
ρ is the cross correlation coefficient
y is the received signal
 MAI CANCELLATION USING
WLPIC
 MAI estimate is weighted by a factor before cancellation.
 Mth stage output of a desired user is given by,

where yk is the received signal

ρk is the cross correlation coefficient
EXPRESSIONS TO OBTAIN
OPTIMUM WEIGHTS

Where Pk,opt is the optimum weight for the kth user

A is the amplitude
ρij is the cross correlation between ith and jth user
SIMULATION RESULTS

BER PERFORMANCE
COMPARISON
 USING RANDOMLY
GENERATED PN SEQUENCES

WITHOUT OVERLOADING
Comparision of MF o/p of single
user with multiuser
Comparison of MF o/p of single
user with MF and CLPIC o/p of
multiuser
Comparison of MF o/p of single
user with MF and WLPIC o/p of
multiuser
 Comparison of MF o/p of single
user with MF,CLPIC and WLPIC
o/p of multiuser
Comparison of BER performance of
MF and WLPIC without scrambling
Comparison of BER performance of
MF and WLPIC with scrambling
No.of users Vs BER – without Near-
Far effect
No. of users Vs BER – with Near-
Far effect
 USING RANDOMLY
GENERATED PN SEQUENCES

WITH OVERLOADING
Comparison of BER performance of
MF and WLPIC with scrambling
and 50% overloading
Comparison of BER performance of
MF and WLPIC with scrambling
and 75% overloading
USING GOLD CODES(Single
set) AS PN SEQUENCES

WITH OVERLOADING
 Comparision of BER performance
of MF and WLPIC with scrambling
and 50% overloading
USING GOLD CODES(2 sets)
AS PN SEQUENCES

WITH OVERLOADING
Comparison of BER performance of
MF and WLPIC without scrambling
and with 50% overloading
Comparison of BER performance of
MF and WLPIC with scrambling
and 50% overloading
Comparison of BER performance of
MF and WLPIC with scrambling
and 75% overloading
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS

 WLPIC performs better for two sets of

gold codes.

 WLPIC performs better than the MF

Detector as well as CLPIC.
 CONCLUSION

 WLPIC performs better than CLPIC and

MF.

 WLPIC performs better for two sets of

gold codes.

 Works well under near far as well as non

near far conditions also.
 REFERENCES
[1]Preetam Kumar and Saswat Chakrabarti ,”OCDMA/OCDMA overloading scheme
for cellular ds-cdma using orthogonal gold codes And Complex Scrambling ,” G S
Sanyal School of Telecommunications ,IIT kharagpur,India,received on May 5,
2008 ;Revised and accepted on June 27,2008.

[2]V.Tikiya, S.Manohar and A.Chockalingam, “SIR Optimized Weighted Linear Parallel

Interference Canceller on Fading Channels,“ IEEE transactions on wireless
communications ,vol. 5,No. 8, August 2006 .

[3]F.Vanhaverbeke ,M.Moeneclaey and H.Sari ,”DS/CDMA with two sets of orthogonal

sequences and Iterative-Detection ,“ IEEE Communication Lettters, vol.4 , pp.289-
291,September 2000 .

 
 
 
[4]Preetam Kumar and Saswat Chakrabarti,” Overloading
Scheme for Cellular DS-CDMA using Quasi Orthogonal
Sequences and Iterative Interference Cancellation Receiver”.

[5]K. Yang, Y. K. Kim, and P. V. Kumar, “Quasi-orthogonal

sequences for code-division multiple-access systems,”IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 46, pp.982–993, May
2000.

[6]Elmustafa Erwa and Jeffery Andrews,”Performance comparison

of Successive and Parallel Interference Canceller”, Dec 9, 2003.

[7]John Proakis, “Digital Communications”.

[8]Theodore S. Rappaport, “Wireless Communications Principles and

Practice”, second edition.