不同寻呼周期下csfb时延对比报告

《不同寻呼周期下csfb时延对比报告》由会员上传分享，免费在线阅读，更多相关内容在学术论文-天天文库。

1、unicom中国联fl内部资料注意保存中国联通武汉LTE试验网不同寻呼周期下CSFB时延对比报告中国联通网络技术研究院网优与网管技术研究部2014年6月目录1.測J试，32.鵬職32.1测试工具32.2场景环境32.3测试用例43.测试结果及分析43.1Extentservicerequest至UAlerting时延43.2Extentservicerequest至U3GRRCconnectionrequest吋延53.33GRRCconnectionrequest至［JAlerting吋延64.71.测试目的木次测试用来验证不同无线环境下，不同的寻呼周期配置对手机终端CSFB

2、的吋延大小的影响2.测试环境1测试工类型数量型号备注测试软件1Xca1NeoD3.3.1.53测试终端1二:SSdgt-19505测试电脑1联想Thinkpad/Dell2.2场景环境本次测试选取沿湖三路的WH90159站为主要测试站点，如下图所示:相关工参如下:PCI站名方向角站高机械倾角电倾角地名206WI1901591001530中央文化旅游区J4205WH901591801530204WH9015926015302.3测试用例设置寻呼周期defaultPagingCycle为32,UE空闲态，分别在好点(RSRP<-85),中点(-85

3、

4、12345678910平均MO好点326.8556.8186.9957.0726.5186.7266.87.1457.1277.026'6.911286.2796.7557.0717.2297.4056.9387.477.327.2166.611'7.032568.0238.0097.7327.717.4098.3277.1057.5497.7487.458"7.71中卢327.1496.8256.1456.7677.2096.2187.2596.9917.176.265P6.801286.9956.7888.0586.776.4947.6927.2386.5636.9526.

5、695'7.022568.5718.7017.3068.6668.3117.6768.2658.7626.8868.292'8.14差点326.466.7146.7486.766.9626.9926.9977.0627.1267.199'6.901287.1126.456.6397.296.3115.6756.256.3876.4947.1466.582566.9356.4567.2436.9586.7316.7627.2357.4587.7587.817’7.14MT好点323.7623.6253.5943.1683.6423.6793.8793.8763.8813.105■

6、3.621283.6143.7674.0523.6273.5953.6533.6093.7843.583.62'3.692563.9854.3993.053.1083.7433.9033.7053.8163.6593.826'3.72中占323.393.823.7883.6553.0673.163.8353.8433.6723.763'3.601283.9843.495.5094.034.0383.4314.4542.9034.0723.357'3.932563.843.8283.9423.9423.8073.7573.7913.2153.2352.97F3.63差点323.6

7、433.0753.5873.5563.5573.623.5333.6653.6083.617k3.551284.1883.5053.853.4153.5863.074.0982.9863.4673.237’3.542563.5912.9883.6023.7243.6453.6073.6753.6513.5523.615’3.57柱状图表如下呼叫建立时延(ESRtoAlerting)■32«128«256从上面两张图表屮可以看出，对于好点的M0，当寻呼周期为32,128,256s吋，吋延分别为