Professional Documents
Culture Documents
NEMO & TEMS Comparison
NEMO & TEMS Comparison
Procedures
Additional Drive Test & KPIs Issue in 4G swap SSV Report. Additional drive tests & KPIs
(DL/UL Max Throughput & PCI(idle),Events, Resource Block Plots, CQI, Throughput, MIMO,
Modulation Scheme plots) issue.
PMCL Remarks :- Above mentioned tests , plots & KPIs should be included in 4G swap SSV report
ZTE Response :- These additional Drive tests , plots & KPIs were not the part of acceptance report
locked earlier. Adding these items will delay the submission deadline of SSVs along with addition in testing
mobile & post processing activities. Moreover these items are not part of acceptance report locked with
other vendor (HW). It is kindly suggested to exclude these items from the SSV.
Drive Test with NEMO KITs Issue. PMCL wants all drive tests activities with NEMO kits.
ZTE Response :- ZTE proposes to do the drive test with TEMS Kits & MOS testing with NEMO kit as
we did earlier in swap project. Given Technical comparison of TEMS & NEMO kits in next slides will further
strengthen our stance.
2
NEMO Outdoor
NEMO is a product of Anite, not with a better product
support.
NEMO GUI is not user friendly. A lot of difficult steps
involves even for a simpler test case.
Indoor Walk tests for IBS not simple enough to
perform with NEMO.
For better Post processing support NEMO Analyzer or
Actix Required, consequently requires additional
licensing.
Less sample rate decoding, causing ignorance from
bad samples.
Doesn't provide SQI.
Event Explanation is not very clear like TEMS.
Separate Log-files for different user terminals (UEs).
Not a good choice of analysis purpose as multiple UE
DT Logs cannot be analyzed simultaneously.
Due to lack in this department NEMO has less
market share in Network Testing Tools market as
compared to TEMS.
Conclusion/Recommendations
TEMS Investigation is as per ITU/3GPP standards like NEMO. But with previously discussed
advantages TEMS is a better choice over NEMO outdoor. TEMS gives more reliable results and
smooth drive test/post processing experience which comforts field Engineers as well Optimization
Team for analysis of field results. ZTE proposes to do the drive test with TEMS Kits & MOS testing
with NEMO kit as we did earlier in swap project.
According to SLA , acceptance is on site level , so site level KPIs (i.e. one single value for site)
should be used for tabular pre post comparison. As in previous swap project acceptance was on
cluster level & tabular comparison was made on cluster level not cell level. We can use cell level
KPIs for monitoring purpose but acceptance should be on site level as mentioned in contract.
These additional Drive tests , plots & KPIs (DL/UL Max Throughput & PCI(idle),Events,
Resource Block Plots, CQI, Throughput, MIMO, Modulation Scheme plots) were not the
part of Acceptance report locked earlier. Adding these items will delay the submission deadline of
SSV along with addition in testing mobile & post processing activities. Moreover these items are
not part of acceptance report locked with other vendor (HW). It is kindly suggested to exclude
these items from the SSV.
Thanks