A Seminar Report On MIMO TECHNOLOGY

In partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of

Bachelors in Technology
SUBMITTED BY:

Durgesh Kumar Jaiswal (Roll no: 1013331039)

Under the Guidance of Ms. Sonia Gupta & Mr. Chandan Dubey

DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING

NOIDA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (NIET) GR. NOIDA

APRIL 2013

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the Seminar entitled MIMO TECHNOLOGY has been submitted by DURGESH KUMAR JAISWAL under my guidance in partial fulfilment of the degree of Bachelor of Technology in Electronics and Technology during Greater Noida the academic year 2012-2013 (Semester-VI).

Date: Place: Greater Noida

Guide Head, Electronics and Communication Engineering Department

(Ms. Sonia Gupta)

(Mr. Chandan Dubey)

Head of department (Prof. Satyendra Sharma)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I take this opportunity to express my profound gratitude and deep regards to my guide Ms. Sonia Gupta and Mr. Chandan Dubey for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant encouragement throughout the course of this thesis. The blessing guidance and help given by them from time to time shall take me long way in the journey of my life on which I am about to embark. Lastly, I thank almighty, my parents, brothers, sisters and friends for their constant encouragement without which this assignment would not be possible.

Durgesh Kumar Jaiswal

CONTENTS
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Introduction...(6) Forms of MIMO. ..(8) Why Multiple Antenna..(10) Function of MIMO.(11) Transmission Over MIMO Systems...(13) MIMO System Model..(16) MIMO in Radio Communication Systems..(18) Application in 3G Wireless Systems and Beyond..(25) Conclusions and Future Trends.(29)

10. Reference.......(30)

ABSTRACT
Multipath is not enemy but ally
Multiple Input, Multiple Output (MIMO) technology is a wireless technology that uses multiple transmitters and receivers to transfer more data at the same time. MIMO technology takes advantage of a radio-wave phenomenon called multipath where transmitted information bounces off walls, ceilings, and other objects, reaching the receiving antenna multiple times via different angles and at slightly different times. The multichannel term indicates that the receiver incorporates multiple antennas by using space-time-frequency adaptive processing.

INTRODUCTION :
MIMO technology leverages multipath behavior by using multiple, smart transmitters and receivers with an added spatial dimension to dramatically increase performance and range. MIMO allows multiple antennas to send and receive multiple spatial streams at the same time. This allows antennas to transmit and receive simultaneously. MIMO makes antennas work smarter by enabling them to combine data streams arriving from different paths and at different times to effectively increase receiver signal-capturing power. Smart antennas use spatial diversity technology, which puts surplus antennas to good use. If there are more antennas than spatial streams, as in a 2x3 (two transmitting, three receiving) antenna configuration, then the third antenna can add receiver diversity and increase range. In order to implement MIMO, either the station (mobile device) or the access point (AP) need to support MIMO. Optimal performance and range can only be obtained when both the station and the AP support MIMO. Legacy wireless devices cant take advantage of multipath because they use a Single Input, Single Output (SISO) technology. Systems that use SISO can only send or receive a single spatial stream at one time.

Fig.1: Diagram of a MIMO wireless transmission system. The transmitter and receiver are equipped with multiple antenna elements. Coding, modulation, and mapping of the signals onto the antennas may be realized jointly or separately.

Fig. 2: MIMO Configuration

MIMO systems provide a number of advantages over single-antennato-single-antenna communication. Sensitivity to fading is reduced by the spatial diversity provided by multiple spatial paths. Under certain environmental conditions, the power requirements associated with high spectral-efficiency communication can be significantly reduced by avoiding the compressive region of the information-theoretic capacity bound. Here, spectral efficiency is defined as the total number of information bits per second per Hertz transmitted from one array to the other. After an introductory section, we describe the types of MIMO and basic concept of MIMO information-theoretic capacity bounds. Because the phenomenology of the channel is important for capacity, we discuss this phenomenology and associated parameterization techniques, followed by examples of space-time codes and their respective receivers and decoders.

FORMS OF MIMO :
1. Multi-antenna types
Multi-antenna MIMO (or Single user MIMO) technology has been mainly developed and is implemented in some standards, e.g. 802.11n products. SISO/SIMO/MISO are degenerate cases of MIMO Multiple-input and single-output (MISO) is a degenerate case when the receiver has a single antenna. Single-input and multiple-output (SIMO) is a degenerate case when the transmitter has a single antenna. Single-input single-output (SISO) is a radio system where neither the transmitter nor receiver has multiple antennas. Limitations: The physical antenna spacing are selected to be largemultiple wavelengths at the base station. The antenna separation at the receiver is heavily space constrained in hand sets, though advanced antenna design and algorithm techniques are under discussion.

Fig. 3: Multi-Antenna Types

2. Multi-user types
Recently, the research on multi-user MIMO technology has been emerging. While full multi-user MIMO (or network MIMO) can have higher potentials, from its practicality the research on (partial) multiuser MIMO (or multi-user and multi-antenna MIMO) technology is more active. Multi-user MIMO (MU-MIMO): In recent 3GPP and WiMAX standards, MU-MIMO is being treated as one of candidate technologies adoptable in the specification by a lot of companies including Samsung, Intel, Qualcomm, Ericsson, TI, Huawei, Philips, Alcatel-Lucent, Freescale, et al. since MU-MIMO is more feasible to low complexity mobiles with small number of reception antennas than SU-MIMO with the high system throughput capability. Enhanced multiuser MIMO: 1) Employ advanced decoding techniques, 2) Employ advanced precoding techniques SDMA represents either space-division multiple access or superdivision multiple access where super emphasizes that orthogonal division such as frequency and time division is not used but nonorthogonal approaches such as super-position coding are used. Cooperative MIMO (CO-MIMO): Utilizes distributed antennas which belong to other users. MIMO Routing: Routing a cluster by a cluster in each hop, where the number of nodes in each cluster is larger or equal to one. MIMO routing is different from conventional (SISO) routing since conventional routing protocols route a node by a node in each hop.

Why multiple antenna ?

Nt: No. of transmit antennas, Nr: No. of receive antennas

Large Nt, Nr increased spectral efficiency

Fig. 4: Speed Comparision

10

FUNCTIONS OF MIMO :
MIMO can be sub-divided into three main categories :-

Precoding is multi-layer beam forming in a narrow sense or all

spatial processing at the transmitter in a wide-sense. In (single-layer) beam forming, the same signal is emitted from each of the transmit antennas with appropriate phase (and sometimes gain) weighting such that the signal power is maximized at the receiver input. The benefits of beam forming are to increase the signal gain from constructive combining and to reduce the multipath fading effect. In the absence of scattering, beam forming results in a well-defined directional pattern, but in typical cellular conventional beams are not a good analogy. When the receiver has multiple antennas, the transmit beam forming cannot simultaneously maximize the signal level at all of the receive antennas, and precoding is used. Note that precoding requires knowledge of the channel state information (CSI) at the transmitter.

Spatial multiplexing requires MIMO antenna configuration. In

spatial multiplexing, a high rate signal is split into multiple lower rate streams and each stream is transmitted from a different transmit antenna in the same frequency channel. If these signals arrive at the receiver antenna array with sufficiently different spatial signatures, the receiver can separate these streams, creating parallel channels free. Spatial multiplexing is a very powerful technique for increasing channel capacity at higher Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR). The maximum number of spatial streams is limited by the lesser in the number of antennas at the transmitter or receiver. Spatial multiplexing can be used without CSI at the transmitter, but can be combined with precoding if CSI is available. Spatial multiplexing can also be used for simultaneous transmission to multiple receivers, known as spacedivision multiple access or multi-user MIMO, in which case CSI is required at the transmitter. The scheduling of receivers with different spatial signatures allows good separability.
11

Fig.5: Basic spatial multiplexing (SM) scheme with three TX and three RX antennas yielding three-fold improvement in spectral efficiency. Ai, Bi, and Ci represent symbol constellations for the three inputs at the various stages of transmission and reception.

Diversity Coding techniques are used when there is no channel

knowledge at the transmitter. In diversity methods a single stream (unlike multiple streams in spatial multiplexing) is transmitted, but the signal is coded using techniques called space-time coding. The signal is emitted from each of the transmit antennas using certain principles of full or near orthogonal coding. Diversity exploits the independent fading in the multiple antenna links to enhance signal diversity. Because there is no channel knowledge, there is no beam forming or array gain from diversity coding. Diversity coding can be combined with spatial multiplexing when some channel knowledge is available at the transmitter.

12

TRANSMISSION OVER MIMO SYSTEMS :

Although the information theoretic analysis can be bootstrapped to motivate receiver architectures, it usually carries a pitfall in that it does not reflect the performance achieved by actual transmission systems, since it only provides an upper bound realized by algorithms/codes with boundless complexity or latency. The development of algorithms with a reasonable BER performance/complexity compromise is required to realize the MIMO gains in practice. Here, we summarize different MIMO transmission schemes, give the intuition behind them, and compare their performance.

General Principles
Current transmission schemes over MIMO channels typically fall into two categories: data rate maximization or diversity maximization schemes, although there has been some effort toward unification recently. The first kind focuses on improving the average capacity behavior. For example, in the example shown in Fig. 5, the objective is just to perform spatial multiplexing as we send as many independent signals as we have antennas for a specific error rate (or a specific outage capacity). More generally, however, the individual streams should be encoded jointly in order to protect transmission against errors caused by channel fading and noise plus interference. This leads to a second kind of approach in which one tries also to minimize the outage probability, or equivalently maximize the outage capacity. Note that if the level of redundancy is increased between the TX antennas through joint coding, the amount of independence between the signals decreases. Ultimately, it is possible to code the signals so that the effective data rate is back to that of a single antenna system. Effectively, each TX antenna then sees a differently
13

encoded, fully redundant version of the same signal. In this case, the multiple antennas are only used as a source of spatial diversity and not to increase data rate, or at least not in a direct manner. The set of schemes aimed at realizing joint encoding of multiple TX antennas are called STCs. In these schemes, a number of code symbols equal to the number of TX antennas are generated and transmitted simultaneously, one symbol from each antenna. These symbols are generated by the spacetime encoder such that by using the appropriate signal processing and decoding procedure at the receiver, the diversity gain and/or the coding gain is maximized. Fig. 6 shows a simple block diagram for STC.

Fig. 6. Spacetime coding.

The first attempt to develop STC was presented in and was inspired by the delay diversity scheme of Wittneben. However, the key development of the STC concept was originally revealed in the form of trellis codes, which required a multidimensional (vector) Viterbi algorithm at the receiver for decoding. These codes were shown to provide a diversity benefit equal to the number of TX antennas in addition to a coding gain that depends on the complexity of the code (i.e., number of states in the trellis) without any loss in bandwidth efficiency. Then, the popularity of STC really took off with the discovery of the so-called spacetime block codes (STBCs). This is due to the fact that because of their construction, STBC can be decoded using simple linear processing at the receiver [in contrast to the vector Viterbi required for ST trellis codes (STTC)]. Although STBC codes give the same diversity gain as the STTC for the same number
14

of TX antennas, they provide zero or minimal coding gain. Below, we will briefly summarize the basic concepts of STC and then extensions to the case of multiple RX antennas (MIMO case). As the reader will note, emphasis within spacetime coding is placed on block approaches, which seem to currently dominate the literature rather than on trellis-based approaches.

Fig. 7. Transmitter diversity with spacetime block coding.

Fig. 8. Receiver for spacetime block coding.

15

MIMO System Model :

A MIMO system typically consists of m transmit and n receive antennas (Figure 9). By using the same channel, every antenna receives not only the direct components intended for it, but also the indirect components intended for the other antennas. A timeindependent, narrowband channel is assumed. The direct connection from antenna 1 to 1 is specified with h11, etc., while the indirect connection from antenna 1 to 2 is identified as cross component h21, etc. From this is obtained transmission matrix H with the dimensions n x m.

User Data Stream

User Data Stream

H Channel Matrix

Fig.9: General MIMO

y = Hs + n
hij is a Complex Gaussian random variable that models fading gain between the ith transmit and jth receive antenna
Formula1 :Matrix H

16

The following transmission formula results from receive vector y, transmit vector x, and noise n:y = Hx + n
Formula 2: MIMO transmission

Data to be transmitted is divided into independent data streams. The number of streams M is always less than or equal to the number of antennas; in the case of asymmetrical (m E n) antenna constellations, it is always smaller or equal the minimum number of antennas. For example, a 4x4 system could be used to transmit four or fewer streams, while a 3x2 system could transmit two or fewer streams. Theoretically, the capacity C increases linearly with the number of streams M.

Formula 3: Shannon-Hartley theorem for MIMO

Because of the sensitivity of MIMO algorithms with respect to the channel matrix properties, channel modeling is particularly critical to assess the relative performance of the various MIMO architectures shown earlier in various terrains. Key modeling parameters, for which results from measurements of MIMO, as well as SISO can be exploited include path loss, shadowing, Doppler spread and delay spread profiles, and the Ricean K factor distribution. Much more specific to MIMO and, hence, of interest here, are the joint antenna correlations at transmit and receive ends; the channel matrix singular value distribution. In practice, the latter is more accurately represented by the distribution of eigenvalues of HH*. In what follows, we describe the impact of environmental parameters (LOS component, density of scattering) and antenna parameters (spacing, polarization) on the correlation/eigenvalue distribution.
17

MIMO in Radio Communications Systems :

Various mobile radio and network standards use MIMO. This section provides a brief overview of the various implementations. In principle, all standards use TX diversity and spatial multiplexing. More detailed explanations for the individual standards are provided in the dedicated sections.

1. 3GPP UMTS
The 3GPP mobile radio standard (UMTS) has undergone numerous phases of development. Starting with WCDMA, various data acceleration methods have been introduced, including HSDPA and HSUPA. The newest releases cover HSPA+ and Long Term Evolution (LTE). 1.1 HSPA+ (3GPP Release 7/8) A transmit diversity mode had already been introduced in Release 99 (WCDMA). Release 7 of the 3GPP specification (HSPA+) expanded this approach to MIMO and again increased the data rate with respect to Release 6 (HSDPA). The introduction of 64QAM modulation and MIMO in the downlink makes a peak data rate of 28 Mbps (Rel. 7) possible. In Rel. 7 MIMO and 64QAM can not be used simultaneously. Since Rel. 8 the simultaneous use is possible which leads to peak data rates up to 42 Mbps. Uplink MIMO is not provided. MIMO was introduced in the form of a double transmit antenna array (D-TxAA) for the high speed downlink shared channel (HSDSCH). With D-TxAA, two independent data streams can be transmitted simultaneously over the radio channel using the same WCDMA channelization codes. The two data streams are indicated in figure. After spreading and scrambling, precoding based on weight factors is applied to optimize the signal for transmission over the
18

mobile radio channel. Four precoding weights w1 to w4 are available. The first stream is multiplied with w1 and w2, the second stream is multiplied with w3 and w4. The weights can take the following values:

Formula 4

Note that w1 is always fixed, and only w2 can be selected by the base station. Weights w3 and w4 are automatically derived from w1 and w2, because they have to be orthogonal. The base station selects the optimum weight factors based on proposals reported by the UE in the uplink.

Fig. 10: HSPA+ MIMO

In addition to the use of MIMO in HS-DSCH, the weight information must be transmitted to the UE via the HS-SCCH control channel. Although MIMO is not provided in the uplink, MIMO-relevant information still does have to be transmitted in the uplink. The UE sends a precoding control indication (PCI) and a channel quality indication (CQI) in the HS-DPCCH, which allows the base station to adapt the modulation, coding scheme, and precoding weight to the channel conditions.
19

1.2 LTE (3GPP Release 8) UMTS Long Term Evolution (LTE) was introduced in 3GPP Release 8. The objective is a high data rate, low latency and packet optimized radio access technology. LTE is also referred to as E-UTRA (Evolved UMTS Terrestrial Radio Access) or E-UTRAN (Evolved UMTS Terrestrial Radio Access Network). The basic concept for LTE in downlink is OFDMA (Uplink: SC-FDMA), while MIMO technologies are an integral part of LTE. Modulation modes are QPSK, 16QAM, and 64QAM. Peak data rates of up to 300 Mbps (4x4 MIMO) and up to 150 Mbps (2x2 MIMO) in the downlink and up to 75 Mbps in the uplink are specified. Downlink The following transmission modes are possible in LTE: Single antenna transmission, no MIMO Transmit diversity Open-loop spatial multiplexing, no UE feedback required Closed-loop spatial multiplexing, UE feedback required Multi-user MIMO (more than one UE is assigned to the same resource block) Closed-loop precoding for rank=1 (i.e., no spatial multiplexing, but precoding is used) Beamforming

Fig. 11: LTE downlink

20

In LTE, one or two code words are mapped to one to four layers ("layer mapper" block). To achieve multiplexing, a precoding is carried out ("precoding" block). In this process, the layers are multiplied by a precoding matrix w from a defined code book and distributed to the various antennas. This precoding is known to both the transmitter and the receiver. In the specification, code books are defined for one, two, and four antennas, as well as for spatial multiplexing (with and without CDD) and transmit diversity.
Spatial multiplexing LTE

Uplink In order to keep the complexity low at the UE end, MU-MIMO is used in the uplink. To do this, multiple UEs, each with only one Tx antenna, use the same channel.

2.WiMAX (802.16e)
WiMAX promises a peak data rate of 74 Mbps at a bandwidth of up to 20 MHz. Modulation types are QPSK, 16QAM, and 64QAM. Downlink The WiMAX 802.16e standard specifies MIMO in Wireless MANOFDMA mode. This standard defines a large number of different matrices for coding and distributing to antennas. In principle, two, three or four TX antennas are possible. For all modes, the matrices A, B, and C are available. In the "STC encoder" block, the streams are multiplied by the selected matrix and mapped to the antennas.

Fig. 12: WiMAX downlink

21

In actual systems typically only matrices A and B are implemented:

Formula 5: WiMAX matrices A and B for two antennas

Matrix A corresponds to TX diversity, while matrix B corresponds to spatial multiplexing (known in the literature as "True MIMO"). Corresponding matrices also exist for three and four antennas. Uplink In Uplink-MIMO only different pilot patterns are used. Coding and mapping is the same like in non-MIMO case. In addition to single user MIMO (SU-MIMO) two different user can use the same channel (collaborative MIMO, MU-MIMO).

2. WLAN (802.11n)
WLAN as defined by the 802.11n standard promises a peak data rate of up to 600 Mbps at a bandwidth of 40 MHz. Modulation types are BPSK,QPSK,16QAM, and 64QAM. It is backward compatible with the previous standards 802.11 a/b/g. With up to four streams, it supports up to a maximum of four antennas. WLAN differentiates between spatial streams (SS) and space-time streams (STS). If NSS < NSTS, then a space-time block encoder ("STBC") distributes the SS to the STS and adds transmit diversity by means of coding (Downlink block diagram Figure 13). Figure 12 shows the matrix for NSS = 1 and NSTS = 2 as an example.

Fig. 12: Coding for SS -> STS (NSS = 1, NSTS = 2)

22

Fig. 13: WLAN downlink

In the "spatial Mapping" block, the STS is mapped to the transmit chains (NTX). Three different methods are provided: Direct mapping 1-to-1 mapping from STS to TC. Spatial expansion Additional multiplication with a matrix. Figure 16 gives an example of two STS and three TX antennas.

Fig. 14: Example matrix for two STS and three TX

Beamforming Additional multiplication with a steering vector

23

4. Outlook
Future standards will continue to use MIMO technology. At present, the following standards with MIMO are being worked on: LTE Advanced The goal is to provide 1 Gbps at 100 MHz bandwidth in downlink direction. 1xEV-DO Rev. C The goal is to provide 18 Mbps at 1.25 MHz bandwidth in forward link. WiMAX 802.16m The goal is to provide 300 Mbps at 20 MHz bandwidth in downlink directio

24

APPLICATIONS IN 3G WIRELESS SYSTEMS AND BEYOND:

A. Background
With MIMO-related research entering a maturing stage and with recent measurement campaign results further demonstrating the benefits of MIMO channels, the standardization of MIMO solutions in third generation wireless systems (and beyond) has recently begun, mainly in fora such as the International Telecommunications Union and the 3GPPs. Several techniques, seen as complementary to MIMO in improving throughput, performance and spectrum efficiency are drawing interest, especially as enhancements to present 3G mobile systems, e.g., high-speed digital packet access (HSDPA). These include adaptive modulation and coding, hybrid ARQ, fast cell selection, transmit diversity.

B. MIMO in 3G Wireless Systems And Beyond

There is little commercial implementation of MIMO in cellular systems as yet and none is currently being deployed for 3G outside pure transmit diversity solutions for MISO. Current MIMO examples include the Lucents BLAST chip and proprietary systems intended for specific markets such as Iospan Wireless AirBurst system for fixed wireless access. The earliest lab trials of MIMO have been demonstrated by Lucent Technologies several years ago. In the case of 3GPP, some MIMO results are presented here, based on link level simulations of a combination of V-Blast and spreading code reuse. Table II gives the peak data rates achieved by the down that give rise to uncorrelated fading amongst antenna elements are known to be suitable for MIMO. The gains of MIMO come at the expense of increased receiver complexity both in the base station and in the handsets. Also various factors such as incorrect channel estimation, presence of correlation amongst antenna elements, higher Doppler frequencies, etc., will tend to degrade the ideal system performance.
25

A brief discussion on some of the open issues and remaining hurdles on the way to a full scale commercialization of MIMO systems is contained below. 1) Antenna Issues: Antenna element numbers and interelement spacing are key parameters, especially the latter if the high spectral efficiencies of MIMO are to be realized. Base stations with large numbers of antennas pose environmental concerns. Hence, the antenna element numbers are limited to a modest number, say four, with an interelement spacing of around 10*wavelength . The large spacing is because base stations are usually mounted on elevated positions where the presence of local scatterers to decorrelate the fading cannot be always guaranteed. Using dual polarized antennas, four antennas can fit into a linear space of 1.5 m at 10*wavelength spacing at 2 GHz. For the terminal, 1/2*wavelenght spacing is sufficient to ensure a fair amount of uncorrelated fading because the terminal is present amongst local scatterers and quite often there is no direct path. The maximum number of antennas on the terminal is envisaged to be four, though a lower number, say two, is an implementation option. Four dual polarized patch antennas can fit in a linear space of 7.5 cm. These antennas can easily be embedded in casings of lap tops. However, for handsets, even the fitting of two elements may be problematic. This is because, the present trend in handset design is to imbed the antennas inside the case to improve look and appeal. This makes spacing requirements even more critical. 2) Receiver Complexity: MIMO channel estimation results in increased complexity because a full matrix needs to be tracked per path delay (or per tone in OFDM) instead of a single coefficient. Since practical systems typically limit the number of antenna elements to a few, this added complexity is not seen as a bottle neck. Extra complexity comes from extra RF,
26

hardware, and sophisticated receiver separation algorithms.A MIMO receiver should be dual mode to support non-MIMO mode. In the MIMO mode, it will have multiple RF chains (equal to the number of RX antennas), and additional baseband operations i.e., the spacetime combiners and detector to eliminate spatial interference. The additional requirements increase the complexity of a (4,4) MIMO system to about twice that of a single antenna receiver. There may also be additional processing (equalization or interference cancellation) needed due to dispersive channel conditions resulting from delay spread of the environment surrounding the MIMO receiver. The complexity impact of these is not yet fully accounted for. Homodyne detection may provide direct conversion to baseband and, thus, avoid the need for SAW filters in the IF circuitry. This could reduce the RF complexity aspects of MIMO. Whilst the overall cost impact of MIMO complexity is not clear, one thing is clear: MIMO receivers are likely to cost more than conventional receivers and in the terminal the battery life may also be an issue.

3) System Integration and Signaling: The MIMO system needs to be integrated and be backward compatible with an existing non MIMO network. MIMO signaling imposes the support of special radio resource control (RRC) messages. The terminals need to know via broadcast down link signaling if a base station is MIMO capable. The base station also needs to know the mobiles capability, i.e., MIMO or non-MIMO. This capability could be declared during call set up. Handsets are also required to provide feedback to the base station on the channel quality so that MIMO transmission can be scheduled if the channel conditions are favorable. These downlink and uplink RRC messages are then mapped on to the layer 2 signaling messages.

27

4) MIMO Channel Model: The performance of a MIMO system is very much influenced by the underlying channel model especially the degree of correlation amongst the elements of the channel matrix, delay spread issues, etc. While the propagation models for conventional radio systems have been standardized, there is no agreed MIMO channel model by the ITU as yet. 5) CSI at Transmitter: As shown earlier, the channel capacity is a function of the eigenmodes of the channel. The MIMO capacity will benefit from the transmitter having a knowledge of the channel state and may use water filling instead of equal power allocation or some partial form of feedback. Furthermore, knowing the channel correlation matrix, the transmitter could optimize channel coding, bit allocation per substream in addition to amplifier power management. Various power allocation algorithms are discussed in which are optimum during different channel conditions. The feedback of accurate and timely CSI to the transmitter is another open issue.

28

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE TRENDS:

The major features of MIMO links for use in future wireless networks. Information theory reveals the great capacity gains which can be realized from MIMO. Whether we achieve this fully or at least partially in practice depends on a sensible design of transmit and receive signal processing algorithms. It is clear that the success of MIMO algorithm integration into commercial standards such as 3G, WLAN, and beyond will rely on a fine compromise between rate maximization (BLAST type) and diversity (spacetime coding) solutions, also including the ability to adapt to the time changing nature of the wireless channel using some form of (at least partial) feedback. To this end more progress in modeling, not only the MIMO channel but its specific dynamics, will be required. As newand more specific channel models are being proposed it will useful to see how those can affect the performance tradeoffs between existing transmission algorithms and whether new algorithms, tailored to specific models, can be developed. Finally, upcoming trials and performance measurements in specific deployment conditions will be key to evaluate precisely the overall benefits of MIMO systems in real-world wireless scenarios such as UMTS. MIMO Systems are getting us closer to the 1Gbps landmark. At the same time, they provide reliable communications. Different architectures available for use. Developing efficient network protocols for a MIMO PHY layer is an area of open research. Low-complexity detection critical enabling technology for large-MIMO Large-MIMO systems can be implemented Large-MIMO approach scores high on spectral efficiency and operating SNR compared to other approaches (e.g., increasing QAM size) Standardization efforts can consider reaping the benefits of large-MIMO in their evolution
29

REFERENCES
1. www.techalone.com 2. www.en.wikipedia.org 3. www.Radio-Electronics.Com 4. www.intel.com/support/wireless 5. www.cellonics.com 6. www.futurehottechnologies.com 7. www.seminartopics.com 8. www.ieeeexplore.ieee.org 9. www.ll.mit.edu/publications/journal/pdf/vol15_no1/15_ 1mimo.pdf

30