Nekoogar.

book Page 1 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

Introduction to
Ultra-Wideband
Communications

1.1 INTRODUCTION
The recent rapid growth in technology and the successful commercial
deployment of wireless communications are significantly affecting our
daily lives. The transition from analog to digital cellular communications,
the rise of third- and fourth-generation radio systems, and the replacement
of wired connections with Wi-Fi and Bluetooth are enabling consumers
to access a wide range of information from anywhere and at any time. As
the consumer demand for higher capacity, faster service, and more secure
wireless connections increases, new enhanced technologies have to find
their place in the overcrowded and scarce radio frequency (RF) spectrum.
This is because every radio technology allocates a specific part of the
spectrum; for example, the signals for TVs, radios, cell phones, and so on
are sent on different frequencies to avoid interference to each other. As a
result, the constraints on the availability of the RF spectrum become
more and more strict with the introduction of new radio services.

1
Nekoogar.book Page 2 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

Ultra-wideband (UWB) technology offers a promising solution to the RF

spectrum drought by allowing new services to coexist with current radio
systems with minimal or no interference. This coexistence brings the
advantage of avoiding the expensive spectrum licensing fees that provid-
ers of all other radio services must pay.1
This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of ultra-wideband
communications, starting with its history and background. Next the dis-
cussion turns to the concepts behind UWB technology, as well as its
advantages and challenges in wireless communications. The chapter also
eliminates the common misconception about UWB and spread spec-
trum, and it examines the strengths and weaknesses of ultra-wideband
compared to narrowband and wideband communications. Further,
the single-band and multiband approaches that are two major UWB
techniques under consideration for IEEE standardization are explained.
Next we discuss the current Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) regulations for UWB deployment in the United States and briefly
address worldwide regulatory efforts. The chapter ends with a concise
overview of UWB applications; we present a detailed discussion of
present and future UWB applications and their potential markets in
Chapter 5.

1.2 HISTORY AND BACKGROUND

Ultra-wideband communications is fundamentally different from all
other communication techniques because it employs extremely narrow
RF pulses to communicate between transmitters and receivers. Utilizing
short-duration pulses as the building blocks for communications directly

1. The United Kingdom’s spectrum auction for next-generation wireless applications

generated $35.4 billion in April 2000 [1].

2
Nekoogar.book Page 3 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.2 HISTORY AND B ACKGROUND

generates a very wide bandwidth and offers several advantages, such as

large throughput, covertness, robustness to jamming, and coexistence
with current radio services (see Section 1.4).
Ultra-wideband communications is not a new technology; in fact, it was
first employed by Guglielmo Marconi in 1901 to transmit Morse code
sequences across the Atlantic Ocean using spark gap radio transmitters.
However, the benefit of a large bandwidth and the capability of imple-
menting multiuser systems provided by electromagnetic pulses were
never considered at that time.
Approximately fifty years after Marconi, modern pulse-based transmis-
sion gained momentum in military applications in the form of impulse
radars. Some of the pioneers of modern UWB communications in the
United States from the late 1960s are Henning Harmuth of Catholic Uni-
versity of America and Gerald Ross and K. W. Robins of Sperry Rand
Corporation [2]. From the 1960s to the 1990s, this technology was
restricted to military and Department of Defense (DoD) applications
under classified programs such as highly secure communications. How-
ever, the recent advancement in microprocessing and fast switching in
semiconductor technology has made UWB ready for commercial applica-
tions. Therefore, it is more appropriate to consider UWB as a new name
for a long-existing technology.
As interest in the commercialization of UWB has increased over the past
several years, developers of UWB systems began pressuring the FCC to
approve UWB for commercial use. In February 2002, the FCC approved
the First Report and Order (R&O) for commercial use of UWB technol-
ogy under strict power emission limits for various devices. Sections 1.9
and 1.10 present a detailed recent history of the standardization and
worldwide regulation of UWB technology. Figure 1–1 summarizes the
development timeline of UWB.

3
Nekoogar.book Page 4 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

FCC Approves the

Use of Unlicensed
Spark Gap Military Radars UWB for
Transmission, Hertz and Covert Commerical
and Marconi Communications Purposes

1900 1960 1990 2002 Standardization

Efforts Continue . . .

Figure 1–1 A brief history of UWB developments

1.3 UWB CONCEPTS

Traditional narrowband communications systems modulate continuous-
waveform (CW) RF signals with a specific carrier frequency to transmit
and receive information. A continuous waveform has a well-defined sig-
nal energy in a narrow frequency band that makes it very vulnerable to
detection and interception. Figure 1–2 represents a narrowband signal in
the time and frequency domains.
As mentioned in Section 1.2, UWB systems use carrierless, short-dura-
tion (picosecond to nanosecond) pulses with a very low duty cycle (less

BW = KHz
Amplitude

Power

(a) Time (b) Frequency

Figure 1–2 A narrowband signal in (a) the time domain and (b) the frequency domain

4
Nekoogar.book Page 5 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.3 UWB C ONCEPTS

Ton

Toff

Figure 1–3 A low-duty-cycle pulse. Ton represents the time that the pulse exists and Toff
represents the time that the pulse is absent.

than 0.5 percent) for transmission and reception of the information. A

simple definition for duty cycle is the ratio of the time that a pulse is
present to the total transmission time. Figure 1–3 and Equation 1–1 rep-
resent the definition of duty cycle.

Ton
Duty Cycle =
Ton + Toff
(1–1)

Low duty cycle offers a very low average transmission power in UWB
communications systems. The average transmission power of a UWB sys-
tem is on the order of microwatts, which is a thousand times less than the
transmission power of a cell phone! However, the peak or instantaneous
power of individual UWB pulses can be relatively large,2 but because they
are transmitted for only a very short time (Ton < 1 nanosecond), the aver-
age power becomes considerably lower. Consequently, UWB devices
require low transmit power due to this control over the duty cycle, which
directly translates to longer battery life for handheld equipment. Since
frequency is inversely related to time, the short-duration UWB pulses

2. The peak power of UWB pulses in some cases is reported to be about 1 watt for
1 Mbps at 1 MHz [3].

5
Nekoogar.book Page 6 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

Amplitude

Power
BW = GHz

(a) Time (b) Frequency

Figure 1–4 A UWB pulse in (a) the time domain and (b) the frequency domain. Compare
the bandwidth and power spectral density with those of the narrowband signal in Figure 1–2.

spread their energy across a wide range of frequencies—from near DC to

several gigahertz (GHz)—with very low power spectral density (PSD).3
Figure 1–4 illustrates UWB pulses in time and frequency domains.
The wide instantaneous bandwidth results from the time-scaling prop-
erty of theoretical Fourier transforms:

1 f
x ( at ) ←
→ X 
a  a
(1–2)

The notation on the left side of Equation 1–2 shows a signal, x(t), which is
scaled in the time domain by a factor a; the right side represents the same
signal in the frequency domain, X(f), which is inversely scaled by the
same factor a. For example, a pulse with duration T of 500 picoseconds
can generate a center frequency fc of 2 GHz:

1 1
fc = = = 2 × 109 Hz = 2 GHz
T 500 × 10 −12 (1–3)

3. Power spectral density is the signals’ power in the frequency domain.

6
Nekoogar.book Page 7 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.4 UWB S IGNALS

1.4 UWB SIGNALS

As defined by the FCC’s First Report and Order, UWB signals must have
bandwidths of greater than 500 MHz or a fractional bandwidth larger
than 20 percent at all times of transmission [3]. Fractional bandwidth is a
factor used to classify signals as narrowband, wideband, or ultra-wide-
band and is defined by the ratio of bandwidth at –10 dB points4 to center
frequency. Equation 1–4 shows this relationship.

BW ( fh − fl ) 2( fh − fl )
Bf = × 100% = × 100% = × 100%
fc ( fh + fl ) / 2 fh + fl
(1–4)

where fh and f1 are the highest and lowest cutoff frequencies (at the –10 dB
point) of a UWB pulse spectrum, respectively. A UWB signal can be any
one of a variety of wideband signals, such as Gaussian, chirp, wavelet, or
Hermite-based short-duration pulses. Figure 1–5 represents a Gaussian
monocycle as an example of a UWB pulse in the time and frequency
domains. The Gaussian monocycle is the first derivative of a Gaussian
pulse and is given by

t −( t )2
P(t ) = e τ
τ (1–5)

where t represents time and τ is a time decay constant that determines

the temporal width of the pulse.
As shown in Figure 1–5, a 500-picosecond pulse generates a large band-
width in the frequency domain with a center frequency of 2 GHz. In Fig-

4. The –10 dB point represents the spectral power of a signal at 10 dB lower than its
peak power.

7
Nekoogar.book Page 8 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

Center Frequency, fc
0

Power Spectrum Magnitude (db)

1

–10
Amplitude (volts)

0 –20

–30

–1
–40

0 0.5 1 1.5 0 1 fL 2 fH 3 4 5 6

Time (ns) Frequency (GHz)

(a) (b)

Figure 1–5 A 500-picosecond Gaussian monocycle in (a) the time domain and (b) the
frequency domain

ure 1–5b, the lowest and highest cutoff frequencies at –10 dB are
approximately 1.2 GHz and 2.8 GHz, respectively, which lead to a frac-
tional bandwidth of 80 percent; this is much larger than the minimum Bf
required by the FCC:

(2.8 − 1.2)
Bf = 2 × × 100% = 80%.
2.8 + 1.2

Here is the classification of signals based on their fractional bandwidth:

Narrowband Bf < 1%
Wideband 1% < Bf < 20%
Ultra-Wideband Bf > 20%

8
Nekoogar.book Page 9 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.5 ADVANTAGES

For example, 802.11 and Bluetooth have fractional bandwidths of 0.8 per-
cent and 0.04 percent, respectively.

1.5 ADVANTAGES
The nature of the short-duration pulses used in UWB technology offers
several advantages over narrowband communications systems. In this
section, we discuss some of the key benefits that UWB brings to wireless
communications.

1.5.1 ABILITY TO S HARE THE FREQUENCY S PECTRUM

The FCC’s power requirement of –41.3 dBm/MHz,5 equal to 75 nano-
watts/MHz for UWB systems, puts them in the category of unintentional
radiators, such as TVs and computer monitors. Such power restriction
allows UWB systems to reside below the noise floor of a typical narrow-
band receiver and enables UWB signals to coexist with current radio ser-
vices with minimal or no interference. However, this all depends on the
type of modulation used for data transfer in a UWB system.
As we discuss in Chapter 3, some modulation schemes generate undesir-
able discrete spectral lines in their PSD, which can both increase the
chance of interference to other systems and increase the vulnerability of
the UWB system to interference from other radio services. In Chapter 4,
we present a detailed discussion on interference from UWB on narrow-
band and wideband radio systems. Figure 1–6 illustrates the general idea
of UWB’s coexistence with narrowband and wideband technologies.

5. The abbreviation dBm stands for decibels per milliwatt. Hence, –41.3 dBm/MHz is
equal to 75 nW/MHz.

9
Nekoogar.book Page 10 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

Narrowband
(30 KHz)
Power

Wideband CDMA
(5 MHz)

Noise Floor
Ultra-Wideband
(Several GHz)

Frequency

Figure 1–6 Coexistence of UWB signals with narrowband and wideband signals in the
RF spectrum

1.5.2 LARGE CHANNEL CAPACITY

One of the major advantages of the large bandwidth for UWB pulses is
improved channel capacity. Channel capacity, or data rate, is defined as
the maximum amount of data that can be transmitted per second over a
communications channel. The large channel capacity of UWB communi-
cations systems is evident from Hartley-Shannon’s capacity formula:

C = B log 2 (1 + SNR)
(1–5)

where C represents the maximum channel capacity, B is the bandwidth,

and SNR is the signal-to-noise power ratio. As shown in Equation 1–5,
channel capacity C linearly increases with bandwidth B. Therefore, hav-
ing several gigahertz of bandwidth available for UWB signals, a data rate
of gigabits per second (Gbps) can be expected. However, due to the FCC’s

10
Nekoogar.book Page 11 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.5 ADVANTAGES

current power limitation on UWB transmissions, such a high data rate is

available only for short ranges, up to 10 meters. This makes UWB systems
perfect candidates for short-range, high-data-rate wireless applications
such as wireless personal area networks (WPANs). The trade-off between
the range and the data rate makes UWB technology ideal for a wide array
of applications in military, civil, and commercial sectors. We explore such
applications later in this chapter and in Chapter 5.

1.5.3 ABILITY TO WORK WITH LOW S IGNAL -TO-N OISE

RATIOS
The Hartley-Shannon formula for maximum capacity (Equation 1–5)
also indicates that the channel capacity is only logarithmically dependent
on signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Therefore, UWB communications sys-
tems are capable of working in harsh communication channels with low
SNRs and still offer a large channel capacity as a result of their large
bandwidth.

1.5.4 LOW P ROBABILITY OF I NTERCEPT AND D ETECTION

Because of their low average transmission power, as discussed in previous
sections, UWB communications systems have an inherent immunity to
detection and intercept. With such low transmission power, the eaves-
dropper has to be very close to the transmitter (about 1 meter) to be able
to detect the transmitted information. In addition, UWB pulses are time
modulated with codes unique to each transmitter/receiver pair. The time
modulation of extremely narrow pulses adds more security to UWB
transmission, because detecting picosecond pulses without knowing
when they will arrive is next to impossible. Therefore, UWB systems hold
significant promise of achieving highly secure, low probability of inter-
cept and detection (LPI/D) communications that is a critical need for
military operations.

11
Nekoogar.book Page 12 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

1.5.5 RESISTANCE TO J AMMING

Unlike the well-defined narrowband frequency spectrum, the UWB spec-

trum covers a vast range of frequencies from near DC to several gigahertz
and offers high processing gain for UWB signals. Processing gain (PG) is
a measure of a radio system’s resistance to jamming and is defined as the
ratio of the RF bandwidth to the information bandwidth of a signal:

RF Bandwidth
PG =
Information Bandwidth (1–6)

The frequency diversity caused by high processing gain makes UWB sig-
nals relatively resistant to intentional and unintentional jamming,
because no jammer can jam every frequency in the UWB spectrum at
once. Therefore, if some of the frequencies are jammed, there is still a
large range of frequencies that remains untouched. However, this resis-
tance to jamming is only in comparison to narrowband and wideband
systems. Hence, the performance of a UWB communications system can
still be degraded, depending on its modulation scheme, by strong narrow-
band interference from traditional radio transmitters coexisting in the
UWB receiver’s frequency band [2, 4, 5].

1.5.6 HIGH PERFORMANCE IN M ULTIPATH CHANNELS

The phenomenon known as multipath is unavoidable in wireless com-
munications channels. It is caused by multiple reflections of the transmit-
ted signal from various surfaces such as buildings, trees, and people. The
straight line between a transmitter and a receiver is the line of sight
(LOS); the reflected signals from surfaces are non-line of sight (NLOS).
Figure 1–7 represents the multipath phenomenon in narrowband and
UWB signals.

12
Nekoogar.book Page 13 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.5 ADVANTAGES

NLOS

LOS

TX RX
(a)

LOS
Amplitude

NLOS

LOS + NLOS

Time (sec)
(b)

LOS NLOS

(c)

Figure 1–7 (a) The multipath phenomenon in wireless links. (b) Multipath’s effects on
narrowband signals. (c) Multipath’s effects on ultra-wideband pulses.

13
Nekoogar.book Page 14 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

As shown in Figure 1–7, the effect of multipath is rather severe for nar-
rowband signals; it can cause signal degradation up to –40 dB due to the
out-of-phase addition of LOS and NLOS continuous waveforms. On the
other hand, the very short duration of UWB pulses makes them less sen-
sitive to the multipath effect. Because the transmission duration of a
UWB pulse is shorter than a nanosecond in most cases, the reflected pulse
has an extremely short window of opportunity to collide with the LOS
pulse and cause signal degradation.
Although the short duration of UWB pulses makes them less sensitive to
multipath effects compared to narrowband signals, it doesn’t mean that
UWB communications is totally immune to multipath distortion.
Research on UWB channel modeling has shown that depending on the
UWB modulation scheme used, low-powered UWB pulses can become
significantly distorted in indoor channels where a large number of objects
and scatterers are closely spaced.
For a comprehensive discussion on various UWB modulation techniques
and their performance in multipath channels, refer to Chapter 3.

1.5.7 SUPERIOR PENETRATION PROPERTIES

Unlike narrowband technology, UWB systems can penetrate effectively
through different materials. The low frequencies included in the broad
range of the UWB frequency spectrum have long wavelengths, which
allows UWB signals to penetrate a variety of materials, including walls.
This property makes UWB technology viable for through-the-wall com-
munications and ground-penetrating radars. However, the material pen-
etration capability of UWB signals is useful only when they are allowed to
occupy the low-frequency portion of the radio spectrum.

14
Nekoogar.book Page 15 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.5 ADVANTAGES

1.5.8 SIMPLE TRANSCEIVER ARCHITECTURE

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, UWB transmission is carrierless,
meaning that data is not modulated on a continous waveform with a spe-
cific carrier frequency, as in narrowband and wideband technologies.
Carrierless transmission requires fewer RF components than carrier-
based transmission. For this reason UWB transceiver architecture is sig-
nificantly simpler and thus cheaper to build. Figure 1–8 compares the
block diagrams of typical narrowband and UWB transceivers.
As shown in Figure 1–8, the UWB transceiver architecture is considerably
less complicated than that of the narrowband transceiver. The transmis-
sion of low-powered pulses eliminates the need for a power amplifier

Low
Power Noise
Input Filter Amplifier Amplifier Filter Filter Output
Mixer Mixer
Data Data Data Data
Modulation Demodulation

Oscillator Oscillator
(a)

Low
Noise
Input Filter Filter Amplifier Output
Data Data Correlation Data
Modulation Receiver

UWB Pluse
Generation

(b)

Figure 1–8 (a) A typical narrowband transceiver architecture. (b) An example of a UWB
transceiver architecture.

15
Nekoogar.book Page 16 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

(PA) in UWB transmitters. Also, because UWB transmission is carrier-

less, there is no need for mixers and local oscillators to translate the car-
rier frequency to the required frequency band; consequently there is no
need for a carrier recovery stage at the receiver end. In general, the analog
front end of a UWB transceiver is noticeably less complicated than that of
a narrowband transceiver. This simplicity makes an all-CMOS (short for
complementary metal-oxide semiconductors) implementation of UWB
transceivers possible, which translates to smaller form factors and lower
production costs.
Table 1–1 shows the main advantages and benefits of UWB systems over
narrowband wireless technologies.

Table 1–1 Advantages and benefits of UWB communications

Advantage Benefit

Coexistence with current narrowband and Avoids expensive licensing fees.

wideband radio services

Large channel capacity High bandwidth can support real-time high-

definition video streaming.

Ability to work with low SNRs Offers high performance in noisy environments.

Low transmit power Provides high degree of security with low prob-
ability of detection and intercept.

Resistance to jamming Reliable in hostile environments.

High performance in multipath channels Delivers higher signal strengths in adverse

conditions.

Simple transceiver architecture Enables ultra-low power, smaller form factor,

and better mean time between failures, all at a
reduced cost.

16
Nekoogar.book Page 17 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.6 C HALLENGES

1.6 CHALLENGES
UWB technology for communications is not all about advantages. In fact,
there are many challenges involved in using nanosecond-duration pulses
for communications. Some of the main difficulties of UWB communica-
tions are discussed in the following subsections.

1.6.1 PULSE-S HAPE DISTORTION

The transmission characteristics of UWB pulses are more complicated
than those of continuous narrowband sinusoids. A narrowband signal
remains sinusoidal throughout the transmission channel. However, the
weak and low-powered UWB pulses can be distorted significantly by the
transmission link. We can show this distortion mathematically with the
widely used Friis transmission formula:

c 2
Pr = Pt Gt Gr ( )
4π df
(1–7)

where Pr and Pt are the received and transmitted signal power, respec-
tively; Gt and Gr are the transmitter and receiver antenna gains, respec-
tively; c is the speed of light;6 d is the distance between the transmitter and
the receiver; and f is the signal frequency.
This formula shows that the received signal power will decrease quadrati-
cally with the increase in frequency. In narrowband signals with a very
narrow frequency band, the change in frequency only minimally changes
the received power and hence can be overlooked. However, due to the
wide range of frequencies that is covered by the UWB spectrum, the

6. In a vacuum, all electromagnetic waveforms travel at the speed of light, c = 3 × 108

meters per second.

17
Nekoogar.book Page 18 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

received power drastically changes and thus distorts the pulse shape. This
will limit the performance of UWB receivers that correlate the received
pulses with a predefined template such as classical matched filters. We
discuss UWB receivers and their performance in detail in Chapter 3.

1.6.2 CHANNEL ESTIMATION

Channel estimation is a core issue for receiver design in wireless commu-
nications systems. Because it is not possible to measure every wireless
channel in the field, it is important to use training sequences to estimate
channel parameters, such as attenuations and delays of the propagation
path. Given that most UWB receivers correlate the received signal with a
predefined template signal, prior knowledge of the wireless channel param-
eters is necessary to predict the shape of the template signal that matches
the received signal. However, as a result of the wide bandwidth and reduced
signal energy, UWB pulses undergo severe pulse distortion; thus, channel
estimation in UWB communications systems becomes very complicated [6].

1.6.3 HIGH-FREQUENCY SYNCHRONIZATION

Time synchronization is a major challenge and a rich area of study in
UWB communications systems. As with any other wireless communica-
tions system, time synchronization between the receiver and the trans-
mitter is a must for UWB transmitter/receiver pairs. However, sampling
and synchronizing nanosecond pulses place a major limitation on the
design of UWB systems. In order to sample these narrow pulses, very fast
(on the order of gigahertz) analog-to-digital converters (ADCs) are needed.
Moreover, the strict power limitations and short pulse duration make the
performance of UWB systems highly sensitive to timing errors such as jitter
and drift. This can become a major issue in the success of pulse-position

18
Nekoogar.book Page 19 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.6 C HALLENGES

modulation (PPM) receivers, which rely on detecting the exact position

of the received signal. For a thorough discussion on UWB PPM receivers,
refer to Chapter 3.

1.6.4 MULTIPLE-A CCESS INTERFERENCE

In a multiuser or a multiple-access communications system, different
users or devices send information independently and concurrently over a
shared transmission medium (such as the air interface in wireless com-
munications). At the receiving end, one or more receivers should be able
to separate users and detect information from the user of interest. Inter-
ference from other users with the user of interest is called multiple-access
interference (MAI), which is a limiting factor to channel capacity and the
performance of such receivers. The addition of MAI to the unavoidable
channel noise and narrowband interference discussed earlier can signifi-
cantly degrade the low-powered UWB pulses and make the detection pro-
cess very difficult. Figure 1–9 represents a UWB multiple-access channel.

User Channel User

1 1 1

User Channel User

2 2 UWB 2
Multiple-
• • Access • •
Receiver
• • • •

• • • •

User Channel User

N N N
Channel
Noise

Figure 1–9 A UWB multiple-access channel

19
Nekoogar.book Page 20 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

Table 1–2 Some challenges and problems associated with UWB systems

Challenge Problem

Pulse-shape distortion Low performance using classical matched filter receivers.

Channel estimation Difficulty predicting the template signals.

High-frequency synchronization Very fast ADCs required.

Multiple-access interference Detecting the desired user’s information is more challeng-

ing than in narrowband communication.

Low transmission power Information can travel only short distances.

As shown in Figure 1–9, separating each user’s information from the

combination of heavily distorted and low-powered UWB signals from all
users is a very challenging task. A comprehensive study of multiple-access
techniques in UWB systems appears in Chapter 3.
Table 1–2 summarizes the challenges and problems that narrow pulses
can bring to UWB communications systems.

1.7 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN UWB AND SPREAD

SPECTRUM
Although UWB is a growing technology and more information on its
concepts and capabilities becomes available every day, many misconcep-
tions are associated with its name. A good number of people confuse
UWB communications with wideband spread-spectrum techniques. Even
though both UWB and spread-spectrum techniques have their origins in
military secure communications, we need to clarify a fundamental differ-
ence between the two. For this reason, it is important to briefly review
two commonly used spread-spectrum techniques—DSSS and FHSS.

20
Nekoogar.book Page 21 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.7 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN UWB AND SPREAD SPECTRUM

1.7.1 DIRECT-SEQUENCE SPREAD SPECTRUM

In direct-sequence spread spectrum (DSSS), a pseudorandom code is used
to spread each data bit with a large number of chips, where a chip interval
is much smaller than a bit interval, as shown in Figure 1–10. These code
words spread the data to a larger bandwidth than required to transmit
information. In Figure 1–10, the data bit 1 is represented by a four-bit code
(1010) and the data bit 0 is represented by another four-bit code (1100).
Spreading the data to shorter duration chips in time results in a spread of
energy in the frequency domain to slightly above a typical narrowband
receiver’s noise floor. In order to transmit data, each of the chips is modu-
lated with conventional narrowband techniques.

1.7.2 FREQUENCY -HOPPING SPREAD S PECTRUM

The frequency-hopping spread-spectrum (FHSS) technique was invented
by actress Hedy Lamarr and patented in 1942 as “Secret Communication
System” [7]. FHSS in concept is exactly like DSSS in terms of spreading
the signal energy in the frequency domain and offering the advantages
of wideband communications. However, the wide bandwidth does not

Bit
Interval

Original Data: 1 0 1 1

Spreading the Data: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

Chip
Interval

Figure 1–10 A data sequence and a spreading code using DSSS

21
Nekoogar.book Page 22 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

result from spreading the data, as in the DSSS technique. Instead, FHSS
hops the frequencies used for transmission and reception according to a
pseudorandom code, and the combination of those frequencies generates
a wide bandwidth. The change in frequencies that represent the data bits
happens so fast that detection becomes very difficult for unauthorized
parties. As shown in Figure 1–11, the signal hops from one frequency to
another at each instance in time.

1.7.3 THE ESSENTIAL D IFFERENCES

Both the DSSS and the FHSS techniques offer a spread in the frequency
domain and provide advantages over narrowband communications such
as lower power spectral density, covertness, frequency diversity for better
performance in multipath channels, and resistance to intentional and
unintentional jamming. So the natural question is “What is the difference
between UWB and spread spectrum?”
Although UWB and spread-spectrum techniques share the same advantage
of expanded bandwidth, the method of achieving the large bandwidth is
the main distinction between the two technologies. In conventional
Frequency

Time

Figure 1–11 Frequency hopping in the FHSS technique

22
Nekoogar.book Page 23 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.7 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN UWB AND SPREAD SPECTRUM

spread-spectrum techniques, the signals are continuous-wave sinusoids

that are modulated with a fixed carrier frequency. In UWB communica-
tions, on the other hand, there is no carrier frequency; the short duration
of UWB pulses directly generates an extremely wide bandwidth (as we
saw in Equation 1–2). Another distinguishing factor in UWB is the very
large bandwidth. Spread-spectrum techniques can offer megahertz of
bandwidth, while UWB pulses provide several gigahertz of bandwidth.
Figure 1–12 shows the time and frequency domain representation of
narrowband, wideband, and UWB signals.

Time Frequency
BW = KHz
Narrow Band

Noise
Floor

Spread-spectrum
Wideband
BW = MHz

Spreading
Sequence

UWB
BW = GHz

Figure 1–12 The transition from narrowband to wideband and ultra-wideband in the time
and frequency domains

23
Nekoogar.book Page 24 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

As shown in Figure 1–12, in narrowband technologies, CW signals

occupy a well-defined and narrow range in the frequency spectrum; how-
ever, in wideband technologies, the frequency range of the CW signals is
spread to slightly above the noise floor due to the use of spreading
sequences. In UWB, the short duration of a pulse automatically creates
the very large bandwidth of several gigahertz without using the spreading
codes. Also, notice that narrowband signals are always present, so their
duty cycle is 100 percent, while UWB pulses are present only for a very
short time, with a duty cycle of less than 0.5 percent. As explained in Sec-
tion 1.3, the low duty cycle offers very low transmission power and extra
covertness compared to spread-spectrum techniques. However, the low
transmission power could be a disadvantage for UWB systems, because
the information can travel only short distances. Therefore, for long-range
applications, spread-spectrum techniques are still more appropriate.

1.8 SINGLE BAND VS. MULTIBAND

The ability of UWB technology to provide very high data rates for short
ranges (less than 10 meters) has made it an excellent candidate for the
physical layer of the IEEE 802.15.3a standard for wireless personal area
networks (WPANs). However, two opposing groups of UWB developers
are battling over the IEEE standard. The two competing technologies are
single band and multiband. The single-band technique, backed by
Motorola/XtremeSpectrum, supports the idea of impulse radio that is the
original approach to UWB by using narrow pulses that occupy a large
portion of the spectrum. The multiband approach divides the available
UWB frequency spectrum (3.1 GHz to 10.6 GHz) into multiple smaller
and nonoverlapping bands with bandwidths greater than 500 MHz to
obey the FCC’s definition of UWB signals. The multiband approach is
supported by several companies, including Staccato Communications,
Intel, Texas Instruments, General Atomics, and Time Domain Corporation.

24
Nekoogar.book Page 25 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.8 SINGLE B AND VS . M ULTIBAND

To date, several proposals from both groups have been submitted to the
IEEE 802.15.3a working group, and the decision is yet to be made because
both technologies are impressive and have technical credibility. The fol-
lowing subsections discuss the two leading candidates for the 802.15.3a
standard: direct-sequence UWB (DS-UWB) and multiband orthogonal
frequency division multiplexing (OFDM).

1.8.1 DIRECT-SEQUENCE UWB

Direct-sequence UWB is a single-band approach that uses narrow UWB
pulses and time-domain signal processing combined with well-understood
DSSS techniques to transmit and receive information. Figure 1–13 illus-
trates this approach.
Data representation in this approach is based on simple bi-phase shift
keying (BPSK) modulation, and rake receivers are used to capture the

Impulse Radio
0

–1

–2

–3
Power (dB)

–4

–5

–6

–7

–8

–9

–10
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5
Frequency (GHz)

Figure 1–13 DS-UWB transmits a single pulse over a huge swath of spectrum to represent
data. Courtesy of Staccato Communications Inc.

25
Nekoogar.book Page 26 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

signal energy from multiple paths in a multipath channel. According to

the proposals sent to the IEEE 802.15.3a standardization committee by
the proponents of this technology, the DS-UWB technique is scalable and
can achieve data rates in excess of 1 Gbps. The technical reason behind
using DS-UWB is the propagation benefits of ultra-wideband pulses,
which experience no Rayleigh fading. In contrast, narrowband transmis-
sions degrade significantly due to fading.

1.8.2 MULTIBAND OFDM

The multiband UWB approach uses the 7500 MHz of the RF spectrum
available to UWB communications in a way that differs from traditional
UWB techniques. The UWB frequency band is divided into multiple
smaller bands with bandwidths greater than 500 MHz. Figure 1–14
depicts the result.

Multibands
0

–1

–2

–3
Power (dB)

–4

–5

–6

–7

–8

–9

–10
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5
Frequency (GHz)

Figure 1–14 The multiband approach divides the available UWB spectrum into several
nonoverlapping smaller bands. Courtesy of Staccato Communications Inc.

26
Nekoogar.book Page 27 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.9 THE R EGULATORY SITUATION

This approach is similar to the narrowband frequency-hopping technique.

Dividing the UWB spectrum into multiple frequency bands offers the
advantage of avoiding transmission over certain bands, such as 802.11a at
5 GHz, to prevent potential interference. In the multiband approach, UWB
pulses are not as narrow as in traditional UWB techniques; therefore, syn-
chronization requirements are more relaxed. A variety of modulation tech-
niques have been proposed by industry leaders for the multiband approach;
however, OFDM, which was initially proposed by Texas Instruments, offers
improved performance for high-data-rate applications.
As explained briefly, both technologies are technically valid and impres-
sive. Supporters of DS-UWB criticize the multiband OFDM systems for
their complexity, which results from using complex Fast Fourier Trans-
forms (FFTs). On the other side, advocates of multiband OFDM believe
that their technique offers better coexistence with other radio services,
and they disapprove of DS-UWB because of possible interference con-
cerns. The debate will likely continue until the IEEE 802.15.3a standard-
ization committee reaches a decision.

1.9 THE REGULATORY SITUATION7

1.9.1 CURRENT FCC R EGULATIONS
On February 14, 2002, the FCC ruled to open up an unprecedented
amount of bandwidth for commercial development of UWB technology.
After much lobbying on both sides to either reduce or tighten the FCC
restrictions, the FCC agreed to the requests of a wide range of supporters.
Thus, a year later in February 2003, the FCC’s release of a Memorandum
Opinion and Order (MO&O) assured developers that UWB is here to stay.
These supporters run the gamut from leading companies in the home

7. Section 1.9 copyright © ON World Emerging Wireless Research. Reprinted with permission.

27
Nekoogar.book Page 28 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

networking arena; to consumer electronics giants such as Philips Elec-

tronics and Samsung Electronics; to personal computing heavyweights
such as Intel, Texas Instruments, and Microsoft; and to a growing number
of UWB developers such as Multispectral Solutions, Pulse~LINK, Staccato
Communications, Time Domain Corporation, and XtremeSpectrum, as
well as several U.S. organizations such as the Ground Penetrating Radar
Industry Coalition (GPRIC).
The FCC spectral mask (that is, the operating restrictions for UWB in the
United States) specifies 7.5 GHz of usable spectrum bandwidth between
3.1 GHz and 10.6 GHz for communications devices. The FCC also pro-
tects existing users operating within this spectrum by limiting the UWB
signal’s transmit power. The UWB devices’ power spectral density levels are
limited to –41.3 dBm/MHz. The primary difference between indoor and
outdoor operation is the higher degree of attenuation required for the out-
of-band region for outdoor operations. This further protects GPS receiv-
ers, centered at 1.6 GHz. Previously at an IEEE meeting in July 2003, the
Multiband OFDM Alliance (MBOA) and Motorola/XtremeSpectrum
groups had argued over whether or not the MBOA can use a frequency-
hopping technique and still meet the 802.15.3a’s data and range require-
ments while remaining in compliance with the FCC’s stated declarations
on how frequency-hopping systems should be tested. While the FCC has
set precedents in terms of changing the rules according to newly defined
IEEE standards (for example, 802.11), few rules were as strongly debated
as those for UWB. Adding to this complexity is the fact that the original
UWB opponents are continuing to debate the original FCC rules [8].
In September 2003, the FCC passed on the burden to the Task Group 3a
to prove that any UWB standard developed remains within the antici-
pated levels reflected in the current rules. This action has heated up an
increasingly contentious situation between the two groups. Although
UWB detractors continue to lobby, UWB is here to stay and developers
are pushing on.

28
Nekoogar.book Page 29 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.9 THE R EGULATORY SITUATION

1.9.2 WORLDWIDE R EGULATORY EFFORTS

Currently, UWB is legal only in the United States; however, international
regulatory bodies are considering possible rules and emission limits that
would help enable worldwide operation of UWB devices. Intel is working
with local regulatory efforts in Japan, Europe, and China to achieve regu-
lations similar to those produced by the FCC. Harmonized worldwide
regulations would provide a significant benefit for UWB technology, allow-
ing devices to be carried around the world without service interruption.
Although regulatory bodies outside the United States have been more
skeptical of the viability and legality of UWB, there are many efforts under
way to change this. The FCC guidelines are forming the template for glo-
bal regulatory rulings, with Canada, Europe, Japan, Korea, and Singapore
all interested in adhering closely to the ruling. Regulatory approval in
Europe and Asia is expected soon, based on the aggressive efforts of Intel,
Philips, Sony, Sharp, Panasonic, STMicroelectronics, Texas Instruments,
and Motorola/XtremeSpectrum, as well as startups such as Wisair.

Europe
Europe has several UWB projects under way, such as Ultra-wideband Con-
cepts for Ad hoc Networks (UCAN), the Ultra Wideband Audio Video
Entertainment System (ULTRAWAVES), and Pervasive Ultra-wideband Low
Spectral Energy Radio Systems (PULSERS).8 These efforts are driven by
companies such as STMicroelectronics, Philips, Wisair, and XtremeSpectrum.
UCAN has published reports concentrating on UWB channel propaga-
tion loss, medium access control (MAC) and routing protocols, as well as
a strategy for path selection. Some UCAN partners are involved in the
preparation of an FP6 (6th Framework of the EU-IST Program) Integrated

8. The goal of PULSERS is to develop novel UWB devices starting from proofs of con-
cept to fully working prototypes.

29
Nekoogar.book Page 30 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

Project: PULSERS. Philips and Wisair are leading the PULSERS and
ULTRAWAVES project. ULTRAWAVES’ objective is to provide high-
performance and low-cost wireless home connectivity solutions, support-
ing applications requiring home multistreaming of high-quality video
and broadband multimedia. One of the major goals is to validate ULTRA-
WAVES’ approach, coexistence issues, and other implementation issues in
different layers. Partners include Wisair, Philips, ENSTA-Armines (a top
engineering school in Paris), RadioLabs, Chalmers University of Technol-
ogy, and the Centre for Wireless Communications at the University of
Oulu, Finland.
Although UWB does not fit the usual regulatory paradigm, the European
Community policy is to be permissive and not block or delay technologies
because they don’t fit in a paradigm. The European Resuscitation Council
(ERC) is developing an outline for when short-range devices (including
ultra-wideband systems) can be operated under special conditions.

Japan
In September 2002, after prodding from companies such as XtremeSpectrum,
Texas Instruments, Intel, Sony, Sharp, and Panasonic, the Ministry of
Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications
(MPHPT) in Japan placed an inquiry with the Telecommunications
Council on “Technical Conditions for UWB Radio Systems.” At the time,
the Telecommunications Council was to report this one year later. How-
ever, the status on this is not yet known.
In April 2003, Intel researchers worked with regulators from the MPHPT
in order to allow the first public UWB transmission in Japan, which took
place at the Intel Developer Forum.

Singapore
Since February 2003, Singapore has initiated a UWB program through its
Infocomm Development Authority (IDA). The aim of the two-year UWB

30
Nekoogar.book Page 31 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.10 FCC EMISSION L IMITS

program was to encourage UWB experimentation through the introduction

of trial regulations, to gather experimental data to determine regulations
that will enable future commercial deployment, and to create an ecosystem
of UWB players and users. The IDA will introduce regulations to permit
controlled UWB emissions within a Science Park area as well as hosting a
series of UWB compatibility studies. The UWB program permits experi-
mentation with more relaxed rules than those of the FCC, in terms of
emission limits and in the mode of operation. For instance, trial licensees
will have the freedom to operate the devices indoors and outdoors, with
no restrictions on whether the devices should be battery or AC-powered.
In April 2003, Singapore scientists at the Institute for Infocomm Research
demonstrated an FCC-compliant UWB wireless link that successfully
transmitted and received data at speeds exceeding 500 Mbps over a four-
foot range, doubling the international record of 220 Mbps rate achieved.

1.10 FCC EMISSION LIMITS

As explained in Section 1.9, in order to protect existing radio services
from UWB interference, the FCC has assigned conservative emission
masks between 3.1 GHz and 10.6 GHz for commercial UWB devices.
The maximum allowed power spectral density for these devices—that is,
–41.3 dBm/MHz, or 75 nW/MHz—places them at the same level as unin-
tentional radiators (FCC Part 15 class) such as televisions and computer
monitors. Based on the FCC regulations, UWB devices are classified into
three major categories: communications, imaging, and vehicular radar.

1.10.1 COMMUNICATIONS D EVICES

For communications devices, the FCC has assigned different emission
limits for indoor and outdoor UWB devices. The spectral mask for

31
Nekoogar.book Page 32 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

–40

–45
UWB EIRP Emission Level in dB/MHz

–50
3.1 10.6
1.99
–55

–60

–65

Indoor Limit
GPS
Part 15 Limit
–70 Band

–75
0.96 1.61
100 101
Frequency in GHz

Figure 1–15 UWB emission limits for indoor communications systems.

From E. Thomas, “Walk Don’t Run: The First Step in Authorizing Ultra-Wideband
Technology,” IEEE Conference on Ultra Wideband Systems and Technologies (UWBST), May
2002. Copyright © 2002 IEEE. Used with permission.

outdoor devices is 10 dB lower than that for indoor devices, between

1.61 GHz and 3.1 GHz, as shown in Figures 1–15 and 1–16, respectively.
According to FCC regulations, indoor UWB devices must consist of
handheld equipment, and their activities should be restricted to peer-to-
peer operations inside buildings.
The FCC’s rule dictates that no fixed infrastructure can be used for UWB
communications in outdoor environments. Therefore, outdoor UWB
communications are restricted to handheld devices that can send infor-
mation only to their associated receivers.

32
Nekoogar.book Page 33 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.10 FCC EMISSION L IMITS

–40

UWB EIRP Emission Level in dB/MHz –45

–50

–55

–60
3.1 10.6
1.99
–65

Outdoor Limit
GPS
Part 15 Limit
–70 Band

–75
0.96 1.61
100 101
Frequency in GHz

Figure 1–16 UWB emission limits for outdoor handheld devices

From E. Thomas, “Walk Don’t Run: The First Step in Authorizing Ultra-Wideband
Technology,” IEEE Conference on Ultra Wideband Systems and Technologies (UWBST), May
2002. Copyright © 2002 IEEE. Used with permission.

1.10.2 IMAGING DEVICES

Figure 1–17 shows the FCC emission limit for UWB-based through-wall
imaging devices. The operation of these devices is constrained to law
enforcement and rescue teams.

33
Nekoogar.book Page 34 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

–40
UWB EIRP Emission Level in dB/MHz

–45

Imaging Limit
–50
Part 15 Limit

1.99
10.6
GPS
Band
0.96 1.61

–55

100 101
Frequency in GHz

Figure 1–17 UWB emission limits for through-wall imaging systems

From E. Thomas, “Walk Don’t Run: The First Step in Authorizing Ultra-Wideband
Technology,” IEEE Conference on Ultra Wideband Systems and Technologies (UWBST), May
2002. Copyright © 2002 IEEE. Used with permission.

1.10.3 VEHICULAR R ADAR SYSTEMS

Vehicular radar systems are allowed to emit –41.3 dBm/MHz only in the
22 GHz to 29 GHz frequency range. The center frequency of their signal
should be higher than 24.075 GHz. These radar devices are allowed to be
mounted on terrestrial transportation vehicles and can be activated either
while the vehicles are moving or while they are stationary. Figure 1–18
shows the FCC emission limit for UWB-based vehicular radar systems.

34
Nekoogar.book Page 35 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.10 FCC EMISSION L IMITS

–40

UWB EIRP Emission Level in dB/MHz –45

29.0
–50

–55

–60 22.0 31.0

–65

f between 22.0 and 29.0

GPS
Part 15 Limit
–70 Band

–75
0.96 1.61

100 101
Frequency in GHz

Figure 1–18 Figure 1–18. UWB emission limits for vehicular radar systems
From E. Thomas, “Walk Don’t Run: The First Step in Authorizing Ultra-Wideband
Technology,” IEEE Conference on Ultra Wideband Systems and Technologies (UWBST), May
2002. Copyright © 2002 IEEE. Used with permission.

In general, the FCC ruling per application with Part 15 classification of

–41.3 dBm for both outdoor and indoor operations can be summarized
as shown in Table 1–3.

35
Nekoogar.book Page 36 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

Table 1–3 Emission limits for various UWB applications in each operational band

Operation Band (GHz)

0.96 1.61 1.99 3.1 10.6 22.0

to to to to to to
Application 1.61 1.99 3.1 10.6 22.0 29.0

Indoor –75.3 –53.3 –51.3 –41.3 –51.3 –51.3

Communications
Outdoor –75.3 –63.3 –61.3 –41.3 –61.3 –61.3
ERIP (dBm)
Imaging –53.3 –51.3 –41.3 –41.3 –41.3 –51.3

Vehicular Radar –75.3 –63.3 –63.3 –63.3 –41.3 –41.3

1.11 UWB APPLICATIONS

The trade-off between data rate and range in UWB systems holds great
promise for a wide variety of applications in military, civilian, and com-
mercial sectors. Chapter 5 contains a detailed discussion of UWB’s
present and future applications. For now, we present a brief summary
of UWB applications to complete our introductory discussion.
As explained in Sections 1.9 and 1.10, the FCC categorizes UWB applica-
tions as either radar, imaging, or communications devices. Radar is con-
sidered one of the most powerful applications of UWB technology. The
fine positioning characteristics of narrow UWB pulses enables them to
offer high-resolution radar (within centimeters) for military and civilian
applications. Also, because of the very wide frequency spectrum band,
UWB signals can easily penetrate various obstacles. This property makes
UWB-based ground-penetrating radar (GPR) a useful asset for rescue
and disaster recovery teams for detecting survivors buried under rubble
in disaster situations.

36
Nekoogar.book Page 37 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.11 UWB APPLICATIONS

In the commercial sector, such radar systems can be used on construction

sites to locate pipes, studs, and electrical wiring. The same technology
under different regulations can be used for various types of medical
imaging, such as remote heart monitoring systems. In addition, UWB
radar is used in the automotive industry for collision avoidance systems.
Moreover, the low transmission power of UWB pulses makes them
ideal candidates for covert military communications. UWB pulses are
extremely difficult to detect or intercept; therefore, unauthorized parties
will not get access to secure military information. Also, because UWB
devices have simpler transceiver circuitry than narrowband transceivers,
they can be manufactured in small sizes at a lower price than narrowband
systems.
Small and inexpensive UWB transceivers are excellent candidates for
wireless sensor network applications for both military and civilian use.
Such sensor networks are used to detect a physical phenomenon in an
inaccessible area and transfer the information to a destination. A military
application could be the detection of biological agents or enemy tracking
on the battlefield. Civilian applications might include habitat monitoring,
environment observation, health monitoring, and home automation.
The precise location-finding ability of UWB systems can be used in
inventory control and asset management applications, such as tagging
and identification systems—for example, RFID tags. Also, the good per-
formance of UWB devices in multipath channels can provide accurate
geolocation capability for indoor and obscured environments where GPS
receivers won’t work.
The high-data-rate capability of UWB systems for short distances has
numerous applications for home networking and multimedia-rich

37
Nekoogar.book Page 38 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

Table 1–4 UWB capabilities compared to other IEEE standards

IEEE Standard

WLAN Bluetooth WPAN UWB ZigBee

802.11a 802.11b 802.11g 802.15.1 802.15.3 802.15.3a 802.15.4

Operational 5 GHz 2.4 GHz 2.4 GHz 2.4 GHz 2.4 GHz 3.1–10.6 2.4 GHz
Frequency GHz

Maximum 54 Mbps 11 Mbps 54 Mbps 1 Mbps 55 Mbps > 100 250 Kbps
Data Rate Mbps

Maximum 100 100 100 10 10 10 50

Range meters meters meters meters meters meters meters

communications in the form of WPAN applications. UWB systems could

replace cables connecting camcorders and VCRs, as well as other con-
sumer electronics applications, such as laptops, DVDs, digital cameras,
and portable HDTV monitors. No other available wireless technologies—
such as Bluetooth or 802.11a/b—are capable of transferring streaming
video. Table 1–4 compares UWB technology and other currently available
data communications standards.
Table 1–5 summarizes UWB applications in data communications, radar,
and localization.

38
Nekoogar.book Page 39 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

1.12 SUMMARY

Table 1–5 Some UWB applications in military and commercial sectors

Applications

Military and Government Commercial

Data Secure LPI/D communications Local and personal area networks

Communications
Covert wireless sensor networks Wireless streaming video distribu-
(battlefield operations) tion (home networking)
Wireless sensor networks (health
and habitat monitoring, home
automation)

Radar Through-wall imaging (for law Medical imaging (remote heart

enforcement, firefighters) monitoring)
Ground-penetrating radar (for Ground-penetrating radar (detec-
rescue operations) tion of electrical wiring, studs, etc.
Surveillance and monitoring on construction sites)
Automotive industry (collision
avoidance, roadside assistance)
Home security (proximity detectors)

Localization Personnel identification Inventory tracking

Lost children Tagging and identification
Prisoner tracking Asset management

1.12 SUMMARY
With the recent advances in semiconductor device technology and the
FCC’s approval of the unlicensed use of ultra-wideband systems, UWB
development has moved from research labs and classified military

39
Nekoogar.book Page 40 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

projects to the commercial sector. UWB technology brings many oppor-

tunities as well as challenges to the world of wireless communications.
In this introductory chapter, we reviewed the history, background, and
basic concepts of UWB communications. We identified the major advan-
tages and challenges of this emerging technology and reviewed the funda-
mental differences between narrowband, wideband, and ultra-wideband
communications. Also, we introduced the two UWB leading candidates
for the IEEE 802.15.3a WPAN standard: single-band and multiband
UWB approaches. We also discussed the current worldwide regulatory
situation regarding UWB, as well as the FCC emission limits on UWB
devices in the United States. Finally, we briefly explained the applications
of UWB for military, government, and commercial uses. A comprehen-
sive discussion of UWB applications and target markets is available in
Chapter 5.

REFERENCES
1. Online article, http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/05/
08/itu.spectrum.idg/, May 8, 2000.
2. R. Fontana, “A Brief History of UWB Communications,” online
article, http://www.multispectral.com/history.html
3. Online article, http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/rules
4. T. W. Barrett, “History of UltraWideBand (UWB) Radar & Commu-
nications: Pioneers and Innovators,” in Proceedings of Progress in
Electromagnetics Symposium 2000, Cambridge, Mass., July 2000.
5. C. L. Bennett and G. F. Ross, “Time-Domain Electromagnetics and
Its Applications,” in Proceedings of the IEEE 66, 1978, pp. 229–318.
6. I. J. Lahaie, ed., Ultrawideband Radar: SPIE Proceedings, vol. 1631,
January 1992.

40
Nekoogar.book Page 41 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

B IBLIOGRAPHY

7. Online article, http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/fhss/02292387.pdf

8. G. F. Ross, “Early Developments and Motivations for Time-Domain
Analysis and Application,” in Time-Domain Measurements in Electro-
magnetics 1, E. K. Miller, ed., pp. 1–44. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold, 1986.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
2002 IEEE Conference on Ultra-Wideband Systems and Technologies, Balti-
more, Md., May 2002.
L. Y. Astanin and A. A. Kostylev, “Ultra Wideband Signals—A New Step
in Radar Development,” IEEE AES Systems Magazine, March 1992,
pp. 12–15.
H. L. Bertoni, L. Carin, and L. B. Felsen, eds., Ultra-Wideband Short-Pulse
Electromagnetics. New York: Plenum Press, 1993.
J. R. Davis, D. J. Baker, J. P. Shelton, and W. S. Ament, “Some Physical
Constraints on the Use of ‘Carrier-Free’ Waveforms in Radio-Wave
Transmission Systems,” in Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 67, no. 6, June
1979, pp. 884–891.
H. F. Engler, Jr., “Technical Issues in Ultra-Wideband Radar Systems,” in
Introduction to Ultra-Wideband Radar Systems, J. D. Taylor, ed. Bos-
ton: CRC Press, 1994.
R. Fleming and C. Kushner, “Low-Power, Miniature, Distributed Position
Location and Communication Devices Using Ultra-Wideband, Non-
sinusoidal Communication Technology,” Aether Wire & Location,
Inc., report to ARPA/FBI, online at http://www.aetherwire.com/
PI_Report_95/awl_pi95.pdf, July 1995.
J. Foerster, E. Green, S. Somayazulu, and D. Leeper, “Ultra-Wideband
Technology for Short- or Medium-Range Wireless Communica-
tions,” Intel Technology Journal, Q2, 2001.

41
Nekoogar.book Page 42 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

R. J. Fontana and S. J. Gunderson, “Ultra-Wideband Precision Asset

Location System,” in 2002 IEEE Conference on Ultra Wideband Sys-
tems and Technologies, Baltimore, Md., May 2002.
R. Fontana et al., “Recent Advances in Ultra-Wideband Communications
Systems,” in 2002 IEEE Conference on Ultra Wideband Systems and
Technologies, Baltimore, Md., May 2002.
G. V. Glebovich, A. V. Andriyanov, V. Vvedenskij, I. P. Kovalev, V. V. Krylov,
and A. Ryabinin, “Study of Objects Using Picosecond Pulses,” Mos-
cow: Radio I Svyaz, 1984.
H. F. Harmuth, “Frequency-Sharing and Spread-Spectrum Transmission
with Large Relative Bandwidth,” IEEE Transactions on Electromagnet-
ics Compatibility, vol. EMC-20, no. 1, February 1978, pp. 232–239.
E. Heyman, J. Shiloh, and B. Mandelbaum, eds., Ultra-Wideband Short-
Pulse Electromagnetics 4, New York: Plenum Press, 1999.
M. G. M. Hussain, “An Overview of the Developments in Nonsinusoidal
Wave Technology,” in Proceedings of the 1985 IEEE National Radar
Conference, 1985, pp. 190–196.
W. Kissick, “Ultra-wideband (UWB) Applications,” online article, Insti-
tute for Telecommunications Sciences, http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/
home/programs/uwb/uwb_app.html
S. S. Kolenchery, J. K. Townsend, and J. A. Freebersyser, “ A Novel Impulse
Radio Network for Tactical Military Communications,” in Proceed-
ings of IEEE Military Communications Conference, pp. 59–65, 1998.
V. Krymscy, V. Bucharin, and V. Zaliapin, Theory of Nonsinusoidal Waves,
Russian Federation: Cheliabinsk State Technical University Press,
1995.
J. McCorkle, “A Tutorial on Ultrawideband Technology,” Doc. IEEE
802.15-00/082r0, March 2000.

42
Nekoogar.book Page 43 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

B IBLIOGRAPHY

A. M. Nicholson, “Advances in Subnanosecond Pulse Technology,” Phys-

ics and Electronics Department, Royal Radar Establishment Seminar,
Malvern, England, January 1972.
B. Noel, ed., Ultra-Wideband Radar: Proceedings of the First Los Alamos
Symposium. Boston: CRC Press, 1991.
Roke Manor Research, “Ultra-Wideband Communications,” online arti-
cle, http://www.roke.co.uk/uwb/comms.asp
G. F. Ross, “A Time-Domain Criterion for the Design of Wideband Radi-
ating Elements,” IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol.
16, no. 3, 1968.
R. A. Scholtz et al., “UWB Radio Deployment Challenges,” in Proceedings
of the PIMRC 2000, online at http://ultra.usc.edu/New_Site/publica-
tions.html
J. D. Taylor, ed. Introduction to Ultra-Wideband Radar Systems. Boca
Raton, Fla.: CRC Press, 1995.
P. Van Etten, “The Present Technology of Impulse Radars,” in Interna-
tional Radar Conference Proceedings, pp. 535–539, October 1977.
A. J. Viterbi, “Spread Spectrum Communications—Myths and Realities,”
IEEE Communications Magazine, May 1979, pp. 11–18.
M. Welborn and K. Siwiak, eds., “Ultra-Wideband Tutorial,” IEEE 802.15
document, online at http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/15/pub/
2002/Mar02/02133r1P802-15_WG-Ultra-Wideband-Tutorial.ppt,
March 2002.
J. Wilson, “Ultra-Wideband: A Disruptive RF Technology?” Intel
Research and Development, online at http://developer.intel.com/
technology/ultrawideband/downloads/Ultra-Wideband_Technology.pdf,
10 September 2002.
M. Z. Win and R. A. Scholtz, “Impulse Radio: How It Works,” IEEE Com-
munications Letters, vol. 2, no. 2, January 1998, pp. 36–38.

43
Nekoogar.book Page 44 Friday, August 5, 2005 12:38 PM

C HAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTION TO ULTRA-W IDEBAND C OMMUNICATIONS

P. Withington, “Ultra-wideband RF: A Tutorial,” Doc. IEEE 802.15-00/

083r0, online at http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/15/pub/2000/
Mar00/00083r0P802-15_WG-UWB-Tutorial-1-Time-Domain.PDF,
March 2000.

44