Nor microPOPs or other close-distance applications.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cameron Crum" <cc...@murcevilo.com> To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" <af@af.afmug.com> Sent: Friday, December 6, 2019 10:52:02 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] clutter data and drones That is essentially what CN Heat is doing. It is an obstruction. But this doesn't help with LTE and TVWS where clutter is really not a hard stop. On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 10:48 AM Adam Moffett < dmmoff...@gmail.com > wrote: There's a simplified solution to the problem of the LIDAR data not telling you the type or density of the clutter: Treat all clutter as a hard stop. Before you tell me I'm crazy, consider that in unlicensed bands we're trying to get 32+ SNR with a hard EIRP limit of +30dbm or +36dbm. Ergo we need LOS. LIDAR data can't tell us about the nature of the foliage, but it can tell us the foliage is present and therefore tell us that we don't even want to hit this location because even if it works it's going to contribute to sub-optimal sector performance. CBRS changes the math, obviously, because EIRP can go to +47 or some such. In the here and now and for the foreseeable future, that would be an imperfect, but IMO valid, solution for Part 15 use. -Adam On 12/6/2019 10:06 AM, Brian Webster wrote: <blockquote> Clutter data in the public domain is mostly 30 meter square resolution. Cameron has talked about a lot of the issues with the data. Radio Mobile (and TowerCoverage since it runs on that) has the ability to tune the cluster classifications a bit. I worked with Roger in implementing that clutter model. It is not actually part of the Longley Rice propagation model, what he did at my begging was allow a user to manually edit the height and density for each clutter class and then the tool assigns a loss factor per pixel/30 meter square of clutter and then subtracts the sum total of the clutter loss for the ray being propagated. This is not perfect but when the cell companies use their expensive propagation tools, they tune their clutter models for each market by drive testing a known transmitter with a roving unit and run those drive test results against what the software thinks the signals should be. In this process they compare the know clutter classes that were propagated through and it self-tweaks the loss factors is applies for each clutter class. In radio mobile you do basically the same thing but without automation. To get it right you have to go out and measure a lot of your real world signal levels and manually run propagations until the two match (minus your fade margins built in to your plots). This works well if you spend the time, the bigger issue is that the 30 meter square is assigned just one clutter class code. In general it works well for free stuff. The reality of knowing about specific tree lines alongside a house or in urban environments with tree lined streets or in back years, those individual trees to not get factored in to your propagation, just the building losses if that building clutter is set to a height to show as an obstruction(in WISP cases most are not if you are mounting your antenna on the roof for average suburban clutter). The answer to this is to have higher resolution clutter. The terrain data used is 10 meter resolution, meaning there have been hard data points gathered at least every 10 meters horizontally and interpolated. Some terrain data is available at 3 meters but that is not as widely available. So the issue remains how do you get better resolution clutter data. LIDAR can indeed be used and the best versions are actually driven on the streets and not flown from the air. As Cameron mentioned however that data still only gives you the height/size/area where the clutter is. It does not tell you what type of class that it is and/or what type of RF losses each pixel of that data should be assigned, plus you are typically only getting the clutter data from the street facing side. Think of the old movie sets and only seeing the building face. Another method of increasing clutter accuracy is to resample the data from 30 meter pixels down to smaller sized pixels. This has limited benefit. Mostly this can allow you to take things like tree clutter and trim out the highway areas and or possibly cut out the trees with specific building data footprints and assign a different clutter class by pixel. This is very tedious to do on a large scale and you first have to have other good data sources to trim or reclassify these smaller pixels properly to a new clutter class. While all of this gives you a better physical map of what and where you have clutter down to a more realistic reality, you would then have to go back and manually recalibrate the tuning because tuning over larger pixels is an averaging process using the single clutter class. As you might guess all of this takes time and money. At some point there will likely be some cool efforts done by others where we can integrate this. For instance Microsoft released building outline GIS data for the whole country that they machine learned from aerial imagery. That could be used over resampled data although if the buildings had tree cover they didn’t get captured in the first place because they are not visible in the images. There are other open source projects for things like spectrum sensing on a Raspberry Pi and software defined radio that if you put enough sensors out there they might help tune the clutter loss models. https://electrosense.org/ This is probably way more than you wanted to read about clutter data and RF propagations but hey I am a geek like that. Thank You, Brian Webster www.wirelessmapping.com www.Broadband-Mapping.com From: AF [ mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com ] On Behalf Of castarritt . Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2019 4:47 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group Subject: Re: [AFMUG] clutter data and drones Google maps uses some of the 1M resolution LIDAR data. Check out Austin, TX (maybe most other metro areas as well?) in google, enable "globe view", and then turn on 3D. Now use left ctrl and drag with the mouse to move your view angle. This is the data cnHeat and the Google CBRS SAS solution supposedly use. OT: I wonder if any of the usual suspects are making PC flight simulators that use this data. On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 3:30 PM Steve Jones < thatoneguyst...@gmail.com > wrote: <blockquote> The issue with publicly available clutter data is it seems old, poor resolution or inaccurate. If heat is using the same data as linkplanner, its definitely bunk. On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 3:26 PM Adam Moffett < dmmoff...@gmail.com > wrote: <blockquote> Have you looked at CnHeat? We're about to do some testing with it here. They mentioned USGS LIDAR as one of the data sources. Presumably that's blended with other imaging somehow. On 12/5/2019 4:02 PM, Cameron Crum wrote: <blockquote> LIDAR is not clutter specific, it just can't penetrate clutter (it's light) so clutter ends up looking like terrain. The benefit is that you get an elevation, the drawback is that you don't know the type of clutter or how high it is above the terrain. I suppose if you compare the lidar data against a terrain only DEM, you could extract the clutter height. Here is the thing... some propagation does penetrate vegetation to some degree, so if you are talking about frequencies that do, then lidar is not necessarily a good thing to use as everything ends up looking like an obstruction. You also need a model that can actually account for clutter (vegetation) density when talking about how much it will affect the signal. Obviously leaf types and things like that can have other effects, but I'm unaware of any model that goes to that depth. While some account for clutter heights to use diffraction losses and some lump-sum type losses for a given clutter category, none of the models that are in use in the wisp industry account for clutter density and there are only a few in existence that do. You can get high res clutter data (types) from thermal satellite imaging from one of the geospatial data companies like Terrapin Geographic, or SPOT. It is surprisingly accurate and is what real prop tools like Planet use. The downside is no elevations, so you still have user input for that. Unless you are willing to shell out big bucks, don't bother looking. We are talking about 10's of thousands for a modestly sized area. The cellcos can afford it. On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 10:41 AM Adam Moffett < dmmoff...@gmail.com > wrote: <blockquote> Interesting. And unfortunately I don't know any more about LIDAR than a Google Search does. On 12/5/2019 11:27 AM, Steve Jones wrote: <blockquote> Just the SAS administrators will be competitive product. So garbage in garbage out will really apply. Basic SAS functionality is uniform, but feature sets will differ. More accurate propagation modeling every night will be something we benefit from and Im thinking that will be one of the things they compete against each other with. They didnt say that specifically, but the second iteration of SAS will be more bigger, potentially even bigly in its scope. I really thought it was all going to be modeled after cellco, with a bend toward cellcos overtaking CBRS with shady handshakes and involuntary roaming agreements, but it appears winnforum isnt just government lackeys, the people involved have actually put gear in the air or at least listen to those that have. I think cantgetright may have been a co-chair of a committee somewhere Where would a guy who doesnt know what LIDAR is go to find out more about that clutter data? On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 10:12 AM Adam Moffett < dmmoff...@gmail.com > wrote: <blockquote> I think the USGS is making 3D clutter maps with LIDAR. CnHeat is supposed to use that wherever it's available. I haven't heard how that relates to the SAS though. Is this something you learned from the "450 Lady"? Care to share? On 12/5/2019 10:25 AM, Steve Jones wrote: <blockquote> first question is if a guy collects accurate clutter data, can he use it in any of the propagation tools we use? second, and this is where you braniacs come in, what equipment would it take on a drone to collect this data? IIRC drone limit without FAA is something like 300 feet. would that even be tall enough to sweep a wide enough path that it wouldnt take 300 battery charges to do a square mile? I envision a course plotted drone trip that will fly over with a pilot car trailing to maintain the required operator LOS. If you think about how many miles youve put on verifying link paths over the years, its not really a prohibitive thing. CBRS and SAS is whats driving this query, but general propagation anomalies creates quite a pickle that better accuracy/resolution clutter accuracy would alleviate. Please tell me there is already a consortium thats built out a clutter standard with a clutter submission mechanism, that would completely tickle me silly. I also dont know the impact to the propagation back ends as you increase the resolution of the data. Im assuming the SAS administrators are running something a little beefier than Radio Mobile. I could see this being a lucrative niche market, if there were a way around the drone operator licensing requirements (though that cost is pretty minimal). Basically a company builds up a small fleet of drones, outfitted with the appropriate gear. You create an account, input your coverage area (or any region) that you want high resolution data for. they reprogram the course and ship it to you (after collecting the upfront payment, deposit, and massive liability release) they provide you with a road course to drive while the drone does its thing, anticipate points of retrieval for recharge, etc. when its all done, you stick it in the box and ship it back. would be cooler if the whole thing was transported back and forth by amazon drones. If I had a guarantee that the collected data would be useful to the company, into radio mobile, link planner, towercoverage, and SAS administrators, its something i could see a fair price tag of 3-10k on it for our coverage area, and no farmers blasted it out of the sky. we use clutter data now thats antiquated so it would come with the understanding that photosynthesis and bulldozers impact accuracy from the minute its collected. maybe this data is already out there and i dont know? -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com </blockquote> </blockquote> -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com </blockquote> </blockquote> -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com </blockquote> -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com </blockquote> </blockquote> -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com </blockquote> -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
