Design Article
Boosting long-haul microwave capacity with 1024 QAM
Eirik Nesse, Ceragon Networks
3/27/2012 9:34 AM EDT
Commercially Available Levels of QAM
The following table displays the commercially available levels of QAM and the number of information bits that can be represented by the transmission of one symbol. For example, in 4 QAM, a symbol is able to represent two bits while in 256 QAM, a symbol is able to represent eight bits.

This table also indicates an important practical matter: as we create the equipment that can extend the QAM family of modulations, transmission systems get less benefit from each extension. For example, microwave systems that utilize 4 QAM can enjoy a 100% boost in capacity by going to 16 QAM. (In 4 QAM, one symbol represents two bits while in 16 QAM, one symbol represents four bits or twice as many.) To gain another 100% boost, these systems have to be upgraded to 256 QAM (from four bits per symbol to eight bits per symbol). To gain yet another 100% boost, well, we will require the creation of 65536 QAM to get there! Today, the highest commercially available level of QAM modulation is 1024. Doubling this level to 2048 QAM yields only a single-digit increase in capacity and might not be justified in many applications.
There are also a number of physical factors that limit steps up the ladder of capacity advances in QAM. As the number of symbols increases (higher QAM), transmission systems require a significantly higher signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) since the difference (distance in amplitude/phase) between the symbols is reduced and, consequently, the transmission becomes increasingly sensitive to noise. Transmitted symbols are affected by phase noise in oscillators and external noise like interference from other carriers effectively limiting the ability to detect correctly the symbol received. As such, the industry is approaching the point where it is not practical to implement a higher QAM in long-haul networks due to significant limitations in achievable path length, equipment complexity, etc.
1024 QAM in Long-Haul Microwave
Leading long-haul microwave equipment vendors are just now announcing the availability of dependable long-distance transmissions using 1024 QAM. Relative to the industry-standard 256 QAM, this represents a 25% increase in capacity (and up to double the capacity of legacy SDH links), all things being equal. Operators of long-haul microwave links will certainly enjoy the boost to their capacity with 1024 QAM, especially when these upgrades are relatively painless and generally require only a minor and quick swap of equipment and a software upgrade.

Summary
Advancements in modulation offer network operators an easy and inexpensive path to higher capacities to meet demand. The advanced modulation technique, 1024 QAM, is available today and is a very cost-effective way to boost capacity in long-haul microwave applications.
If you liked this article...
About the Author
Eirik Nesse, VP, is responsible for the global strategy for Ceragon’s microwave product portfolio and associated products. Formerly, he was the Chief Technical Architect at Nera Networks where he worked in various positions and has more than 27 years of industry experience. Mr. Nesse holds a BSc degree in Electronics Engineering from University of Stavanger.
The following table displays the commercially available levels of QAM and the number of information bits that can be represented by the transmission of one symbol. For example, in 4 QAM, a symbol is able to represent two bits while in 256 QAM, a symbol is able to represent eight bits.

This table also indicates an important practical matter: as we create the equipment that can extend the QAM family of modulations, transmission systems get less benefit from each extension. For example, microwave systems that utilize 4 QAM can enjoy a 100% boost in capacity by going to 16 QAM. (In 4 QAM, one symbol represents two bits while in 16 QAM, one symbol represents four bits or twice as many.) To gain another 100% boost, these systems have to be upgraded to 256 QAM (from four bits per symbol to eight bits per symbol). To gain yet another 100% boost, well, we will require the creation of 65536 QAM to get there! Today, the highest commercially available level of QAM modulation is 1024. Doubling this level to 2048 QAM yields only a single-digit increase in capacity and might not be justified in many applications.
There are also a number of physical factors that limit steps up the ladder of capacity advances in QAM. As the number of symbols increases (higher QAM), transmission systems require a significantly higher signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) since the difference (distance in amplitude/phase) between the symbols is reduced and, consequently, the transmission becomes increasingly sensitive to noise. Transmitted symbols are affected by phase noise in oscillators and external noise like interference from other carriers effectively limiting the ability to detect correctly the symbol received. As such, the industry is approaching the point where it is not practical to implement a higher QAM in long-haul networks due to significant limitations in achievable path length, equipment complexity, etc.
1024 QAM in Long-Haul Microwave
Leading long-haul microwave equipment vendors are just now announcing the availability of dependable long-distance transmissions using 1024 QAM. Relative to the industry-standard 256 QAM, this represents a 25% increase in capacity (and up to double the capacity of legacy SDH links), all things being equal. Operators of long-haul microwave links will certainly enjoy the boost to their capacity with 1024 QAM, especially when these upgrades are relatively painless and generally require only a minor and quick swap of equipment and a software upgrade.

Ceragon’s Adaptive Coding and Modulation
Furthermore, leading microwave equipment vendors are able to keep their long-haul transmission links functional even in transient noisy conditions. For example, systems such as those of microwave provider, Ceragon Networks, sense the quality of the transmission link and can automatically decrease the modulation technique in case of degraded signal quality due to interference or other microwave propagation problems. So, if a microwave transmission is humming along at maximum capacity using 1024 QAM and suddenly encounters interference, a system such as the Ceragon microwave system automatically steps down the modulation to lower levels until the transmission network, although less capacious now, maintains the requisite level of reliability. As the transient problems disappear, the microwave system automatically re-applies more efficient modulation techniques to regain full capacity. Summary
Advancements in modulation offer network operators an easy and inexpensive path to higher capacities to meet demand. The advanced modulation technique, 1024 QAM, is available today and is a very cost-effective way to boost capacity in long-haul microwave applications.
If you liked this article...
- Head to the RF and Microwave Designline homepage for the latest updates in RF and microwave.
- Sign up for the weekly RF and Microwave Designline Newsletter to be delivered to your mailbox with the latest highlights from the site.
About the Author
Eirik Nesse, VP, is responsible for the global strategy for Ceragon’s microwave product portfolio and associated products. Formerly, he was the Chief Technical Architect at Nera Networks where he worked in various positions and has more than 27 years of industry experience. Mr. Nesse holds a BSc degree in Electronics Engineering from University of Stavanger.
Navigate to related information


janine.love
3/27/2012 9:46 AM EDT
This struck me as a great intro to long haul microwave. It might be a great piece to share with the non-techies in your life to help explain what we do!
Sign in to Reply
chanj
3/27/2012 5:22 PM EDT
Excellent introductory article.
The article mentioned about transmission distance. I am quite interested in knowing the theoretical maximum transmitted distance vs the modulation scheme.
Sign in to Reply
Frank Eory
3/27/2012 6:45 PM EDT
It would be interesting to know how often the system can actually operate in 1024 QAM mode in the real world. In a pure AWGN channel, 1024 QAM requires "only" four times as much power as 256 QAM at the same BER, but the situation quickly gets much worse in the presence of interference.
The 25% capacity gain over 256 QAM is probably well worth the higher electric bill, but what is the effective capacity gain on a typical long-haul system? Can an operator expect to operate in 1024 QAM mode 25% of the time, 75% of the time, or what?
Sign in to Reply
Eirik
3/28/2012 9:35 AM EDT
I guess it's important to understand that we are talking about carrier grade long haul (transport) links here. These links are dimensioned/engineered for very high availability, typically in the range of 99.995 or 99.999 % availability. This means less than half hour of outage per year! In order to achieve these figures the links have ample fading margin; typically in the range of 30 to 40 dB. Increasing modulation to 1024QAM reduces fading margin with 6dB compared to 256QAM. The effect on availability is just a factor of about 2 (doubling the outage), considering flat fading and interference free conditions. It has very limited effect on distance, as these links are not operating at the maximum possible distance anyway (due to needed fading margin). Interference can be an issue, again the sensitivity is increased by 6dB, so it needs to be factored into the availability calculations. Higher lever modulation does not change power consumption or other factors. So bottom line; as it uses adaptive modulation it offers 25% more capacity for 99.99% of the time. For the 0.01% of the time the links will scale down to lower modulation.
We are running a trial link over a 65 km path in Western Norway, using the 6.7 GHz frequency band. This has been running so far for about 2 months without even once changing to lower modulation. I hope this has helped clarify the technology.
Sign in to Reply
Traces
3/28/2012 6:10 AM EDT
Well, for sure, you can only run 1024 QAM on "bluebird days," but that's the point of adaptive modulation. Although having this sort capability that can only be used under the right conditions would seem like a huge waste in the consumer electronics space, infrastructure is a completely different space.
Sign in to Reply
inductioner
3/28/2012 7:46 AM EDT
It seems to me a waste of hardware upgrade. Performance requirements such as SNR for 1024-QAM is so high that it will appear to be defensless against channel fading, not to mention interferers. With adaptive modulation, it turns out to be running as 256-QAM at best as before. But it can be a good fit to wired channels such as cable, etc.
Sign in to Reply
Eirik
3/28/2012 9:45 AM EDT
See comment above. This is real and in live operation. I agree that SNR requirements are more stringent but in real figures it changes SNR requirements from about 24 to 30 dB, a 6 dB difference.
Sign in to Reply
jlgarry
3/28/2012 9:32 AM EDT
As a page for engineers, an analysis of the SNR requirements would have been a helpful, yet easy, edition to make this article much more thorough.
Sign in to Reply
markr1
3/28/2012 12:00 PM EDT
Thanks for the interesting article. I'd like to know more about the additional complexity and cost needed to increase the throughput. It seems like you will definitely need more linear components, lower phase noise and maybe more DSP. Does the extra cost scale with the extra throughput? Or does it cost more than 1.25x to get 1.25x data throughput?
Sign in to Reply
sierra tango
3/28/2012 1:59 PM EDT
great intro article....
Sign in to Reply
EricOleary
3/29/2012 12:27 PM EDT
1024 QAM presents a huge challenge to both tx and rx. On the ttx side, 1024 QAM has a much higher peak to average power ratio which means a big issue to the non-linear power amp. Would that be a compromise between the linearisation technique and the power backoff? On the RX side, it is susceptible to multiopath fading, which can imply a very expensive adaptive equaliser to compensate it. Given the maturity of technologies such as OFDM or SC FDE, should the system be considered with one of these advanced technologies?
Sign in to Reply
Eirik
4/10/2012 4:48 AM EDT
Hi, indeed 1024QAM pose huge challenges in several areas. The peak to average ratio depend strongly on how the 1024QAM constellation is implemented. In the radio described in this case the peak to average for 1024QAM is really not much different to 256QAM. It does require Tx linearization and sufficient power backoff, but compared to 256QAM it’s really not very different. Long Haul microwave radios operate typically with 28-30, 40 or 56 MHz carrier bandwidth (varying with different frequency bands). With such bandwidth, it is indeed susceptible to multipath fading. The debate of OFDM vs single carrier, is not clear cut. OFDM offers both pros and cons in this area. OFDM is potentially offering better robustness to selective (multipath) fading but requires more signal processing and secondly the OFDM signal could offer better spectrum utilisation (due to the more “square” spectrum) but spectrum masks issued by the regulatory bodies (FCC, ETSI) are optimised to single carrier modulation.
Sign in to Reply
ersujan
7/13/2012 7:00 AM EDT
5000iP SerHello Erik
Good to hear that you have used 1024 QAM over a 65 km path in Western Norway, using the 6.7 GHz frequency band.
We are also looking to deploy Higher capacity Microwave Link for long distance above 65 Km using higher order modulation like 1024 QAM.
Could you please share me some technical parametrs ( like TX power, antenna type, antenna dimension, antenna gain, Channel Bandwidth, Modulation,Rx level,Rx sensitivity, Fade margin,Channels) with the link budget calculation used. Which Company Microwave radio you are using for such link.
Hope you information would be very helpful to me and my companyies
Sign in to Reply
van13
1/10/2013 1:02 AM EST
Hi Eirik,
Can you share technical parameters on your trial link. We also want to try a microwave system using 1024 QAM modulation.
Thanks!
Sign in to Reply