Comparison of Angular Spread for 6 and 60 GHz
Based on 3GPP Standard
Jan M. Kelner, Cezary Ziółkowski, and Bogdan Uljasz
Institute of Telecommunications, Faculty of Electronics, Military University of Technology,
Warsaw, Poland
{jan.kelner, cezary.ziolkowski, bogdan.uljasz}@wat.edu.pl

Abstract—In an urban environment, a multipath propagation
is one of the basic phenomena affecting a quality of received
signals. This causes dispersions in time and angular domains.
Basic parameters describing these dispersions are the rms delay
spread and rms angle spread, respectively. The delay spread is
related to a frequency of the transmitted signal and the nature of
the propagation environment. In this paper, we show a mutual
relationship between the time and angular dispersions in the
received signal. The obtained simulation results present a
comparison of the described dispersions for two different
frequencies. In this case, the multi-elliptical propagation model
and standard model developed by 3GPP are the basis for the
simulation analysis of new communication system solutions.
Keywords—angle spread; angular dispersion; multipath
propagation; multi-elliptical propagation model; propagation
environment type; antenna pattern; gain; directional antenna; nonline-of-sight conditions; simulation; milimeter wave.

I. INTRODUCTION
Dynamic development of wireless communications began
at the end of the 20th century with development of
microelectronics and microwave technologies. At that time, a
possibility of using microwave frequency ranges enabled
creating new wireless communication systems operating in
licensed and unlicensed bands. In this way, second (2G), third
(3G), and then fourth generation (4G) mobile cellular systems
and wireless local area networks (WLAN) based on IEEE
802.11 standards was created. At the beginning of the 21st
century, the further development of microelectronics,
nanoelectronics, and photonics contributed to using the higher
frequency ranges from millimeter to terahertz waves.
Currently, the millimeter waves are used, i.a., in the Internet of
things (IoT) and emerging fifth generation (5G)
communication systems.
Modern wireless systems are used primarily in urban areas
or indoor environments. A characteristic feature of these
environment types is multipath propagation. The negative
impact of multipath propagation on quality of received signals
is particularly evident in non-line-of-sight (NLOS) conditions.
Dispersions of the received signal in time and angle domains is
its effect.
Different lengths of propagation paths between a
transmitter (Tx) and receiver (Rx) cause spreading an arrival
time of the signal, and in practice, lead to intersymbol

interference. A power delay profile (PDP) or spectrum (PDS)
are instantaneous and averaged characteristics, respectively,
that illustrate a time-dispersion level of radio channel.
PDP/PDS are energetic characteristics based on the channel
impulse response. Whereas, the rms delay spread (DS) is a
measure of this dispersion. This parameter is often used in
standard models for classification of the environment type, e.g.,
COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) 207
[1], WINNER (Wireless World Initiative New Radio) II [2], or
3GPP (3rd Generation Partnership Project) [3][4].
Whereas, different arrival directions of the signal
components to the Rx is the cause of the angular dispersion in
the received signal. A practical characteristic describing this
phenomenon is the power angular spectrum (PAS), which is
determined in the azimuth and elevation planes. Usually, the
PAS is determined only in the azimuth plane and then, this
acronym means the power azimuth spectrum. In contrast, the
probability density function (PDF) of angle of arrival (AOA) is
more often used in theoretical analyzes. Whereas, the rms
angle spread (AS) is a measure of the angular dispersion.
New antenna techniques like multiple-input multiple-output
(MIMO), massive MIMO [5][6], active phased array antenna
(APAA), massive APAA [7], and beamforming [8] are the
basis of the emerging 5G systems. In this case, knowledge of
AOA statistic properties plays a significant role in the
construction of antenna arrays and radio resource management
in the 5G systems [9].
Empirical research and propagation models created on their
basis show that DS decreases with increasing frequency for a
given environment type. This is well illustrated in the 3GPP
standard [4, Table 7.7.3-2]. On the other hand, AS and DS are
strongly correlated linearly, what is shown in [10, Fig. 8][11,
Fig. 1]. In this paper, we present comparison of AS for two
frequencies of 6 and 60 GHz, which correspond to super high
(SHF) and extremely high frequency (EHF) ranges,
respectively. EHF is commonly called the millimeter wave
range. The analysis is based on simulation studies. In this case,
we use the multi-elliptical propagation model [12], which
considers transmitting and receiving antenna patterns.
PDP/PDS is the basic input data for this model. In the
presented research, we use the PDP from the standard model
developed by 3GPP [4].
The layout of the paper is as follows. Section II describes
the PAS propagation model that considers antenna patterns.

Jan M. Kelner, Cezary Ziółkowski, and Bogdan Uljasz,
“Comparison of angular spread for 6 and 60 GHz based on 3GPP standard,”
in 2018 22nd International Microwave and Radar Conference (MIKON),
Poznan, Poland, 15–17.05.2018., pp. 1–5.

The comparison of AS for two selected frequencies is
presented in Section III. Conclusion is contained in Section IV.
II. MULTI-ELLIPTICAL PROPAGATION MODEL
The genesis of multi-elliptical propagation models dates
back to 1982, when Parsons and Bajwa presented the first
approach of such model [13]. The premise for using confocal
ellipses as locations of signal scatterers are empirical PDPs, in
which characteristic time-clusters can be distinguished. In this
case, a specific delay and power is assigned to each cluster.
Thus, in the radio channel, the power accumulation for the
specific delays indicates the grouping the propagation paths
with the same length corresponding to the PDP delays. Hence,
in the standard models, PDPs are usually presented in the form
of discrete sets of the powers and delays. In the multi-elliptical
models, the Tx and Rx are located in foci of the ellipses. This
approach to geometric modeling gives the opportunity to
faithfully reflect the empirical nature of propagation
phenomena.
In the presented simulation studies, we use the multielliptical model, which additionally considers the local
scattering occurring around the receiving antenna [14][15][16].
To describe this type of scattering, the von Mises distribution is
used [17]. In [14]-[16], omnidirectional antennas for the Tx and
Rx are assumed. However, a three-dimensional version of the
model, which additionally considers the elevation plane, the
transmitting and receiving antenna patterns is presented in [18]
[19]. In this case, the scatterers are located on multihalfelipsoid planes. An analogous method of modeling limited
only to the azimuth plane is shown in [12]. This approach is
used in this paper. Below, a brief description of it is presented.
Input data for the multi-elliptical propagation model are:
PDP/PDS, Tx-Rx distance, number of paths for each timecluster, parameters of the transmitting and receiving antennas,
i.e., gain and half power beamwidth (HPBW) in the azimuth
plane, for each antenna, respectively [12]. In addition, for the
local scattering components, a parameter defining the von
Mises distribution is specified. In the case of modeling line-ofsight (LOS) conditions, the Rice factor is additionally used to
determine the contribution of the direct path component [14].
The number of clusters determines the number of ellipses,
N, whereas, the sizes of the ellipses are defined by the
PDP/PDS delays [14]. The transmitting antenna pattern is used
to determine the PDF of angle of departure (AOD) [18]. In the
case of omnidirectional or isotropic antennas, a uniform
distribution is used [12]. For directional antennas, we use the
Gaussian to model the patterns of these antennas [20].
Deviation of this distribution is related to the HPBW antenna.
Then, the AODs are generated for each ellipse based on the
determined PDF of AOD.
The AOA, φR, is determined for each AOD, φT, based on
the following relationship [21]:



 2ei  1  ei2  cos T
  R  sgn T  arccos 
 1  ei2  2ei cos T



 





where ei is the eccentricity of the ith ellipse, i=1,2,..,N.
The powers of the individual time-clusters defined by PDP
are the basis for determining uniform distributions. These
distributions are used to generate the power of propagation
paths that reach at the Rx surroundings from the individual
ellipses [21]. Then, for directional antennas, the generated
powers are modified by the receiving antenna pattern [19]. In
this case, the Gaussian is also used.
As a result of the described algorithm, we obtain the sets of
AOAs and powers. Based on these sets, PDF of AOA, f (φR), is
estimated [12]. In this paper, the so-defined PDF of AOA are
used to assess the angular dispersion of the received signals.
III. COMPARISION OF ANGLE SPREAD FOR 6 AND 60 GHZ
The comparative analysis of the angular dispersion for two
frequency bands, i.e., SHF and EHF, is carried out on the basis
of simulation studies. In these studies, the multi-elliptical
propagation model is used. On the one hand, this model allows
considering the patterns of the transmitting and receiving
antennas [12]. On the other hand, it allows accurate mapping
the measurement data [16].
PDP is one of the basic input data of the multi-elliptical
model. In simulation studies, we use a universal PDP for
NLOS conditions described in the 3GPP standard [4, Table
7.7.2-2]. This PDP can be used for different frequency ranges,
because the normalized delays are multiplied by DS, which
characterizes a specific frequency and environment type [4,
Table 7.7.3-2]. We use DSs corresponding to the so-called
normal-delay profiles for the urban macro environment (UMa).
In this case, for the analyzed frequencies, i.e., for 6 and
60 GHz, DSs are 363 and 228 ns, respectively. All simulations
are obtained for the Tx-Rx distance of 200 m.
AS describing the angular dispersion and is defined as [20]



  

180



180

 180

 R2 f  R  d R  



 180



2

 R f  R  d R  




To evaluate the influence of the frequency range on the
angular dispersion of the received signals, in simulation studies
for two frequency ranges, we use antennas with the similar
parameters. In the case of the millimeter waves, antennas are
usually directional with a narrow beam. For example, in [22],
the antenna HPBW used in measurements at 60 GHz is 7.3°. In
the presented analysis, for each frequency, two types of horn
antennas are included. For 60 GHz, the antenna parameters are
as follows [23]: (PE9881-20) GA = 20 dBi, HPBWA = 20°, and
(PE9881-24) GB = 24 dBi, HPBWB = 12°. For 6 GHz, we use
similar antennas [24]: (ATH6G18) GD = 19 dBi, HPBWD = 18°,
and (ATH800M6G) GD = 22 dBi, HPBWD = 9°.
In the analysis, we show the influence of the directions, αT
and αR, of the transmitting and receiving antennas, respectively,
on AS for the analyzed antenna parameters. Figures 1 and 2
show the changes of AS versus αT for αR = 0° and the carrier
frequency, f0, equal to 60 or 6 GHz, respectively.

Jan M. Kelner, Cezary Ziółkowski, and Bogdan Uljasz,
“Comparison of angular spread for 6 and 60 GHz based on 3GPP standard,”
in 2018 22nd International Microwave and Radar Conference (MIKON),
Poznan, Poland, 15–17.05.2018., pp. 1–5.

Fig. 1. AS versus αT for αR = 0° and f0 = 60 GHz.

Fig. 3. Comparision AS versus αT for αR = 0°, f0 equal 60 GHz and 6 GHz.

The influence of αR on AS for αT = 180° is presented in
Figs. 4 and 5, for 60 and 6 GHz, respectively.

Fig. 2. AS versus αT for αR = 0° and f0 = 6 GHz.

For each type of antenna, (A)–(D), we show two cases:
• the same antenna parameters are used for the
transmitting and receiving antenna;

Fig. 4. AS versus αR for αT = 180° and f0 = 60 GHz.

• the transmitting antenna is directional and the receiving
antenna is omnidirectional.
In the second case, we can observe the effect of the angular
dispersion around the receiving antenna. This effect allows to
assess the influence of the transmitting antenna and channel on
AS. Whereas, in the first case, we can see the effect of “spatial
filtration” of scattering by the receiving antenna pattern. Then,
we can observe that the selective directional antennas greatly
reduce the angular dispersion of the environment.
The influence of the frequency on the angular dispersion is
definitely more visible for the case with the omnidirectional
receiving antenna. Then, AS is larger at 6 than at 60 GHz. This
is in line with the conclusions in [10][11], where the increase
of AS corresponds to the increase of DS.
The influence of the frequency, and thereby DS, on AS is
practically invisible for two directional antennas. We can see
better this effect in Fig. 3, where the respective graphs from
Figs. 1 and 2 are shown. In this case, the antenna HPBW
begins to play a significant role.
If the directions of the transmitting and receiving antennas
are αT = 0° and αT = 0°, respectively, then ASs are the smallest
and amount to 1.5°, 0.9°, 1.8°, and 0.9° for (A)–(D),
respectively. On the other hand, the total power of the received
signal is usually the smallest for such orientation of the
antennas.

Fig. 5. AS versus αR for αT = 180° and f0 = 6 GHz.

For the omni-directional receiving antenna and fixed αT, AS
is fixed. Then, ASs are equal to 28.9°, 21.5°, 35.8°, and 29.6°
for (A)–(D), respectively. In this case, we conclude like above
that AS increases with frequency reduction.
If two directional antennas are included, the pattern of the
receiving antenna also causes a significant reducing the angular
dispersion. Figure 6 gives the possibility to compare all
analyzed directional antenna type. In this case, for αR = 0°, ASs
are the smallest and equal to 6.0°, 4.7°, 5.8°, and 3.9° for
(A)–(D), respectively. For each of the analyzed antennas, a
single extremum occurs in the AS graphs for | αR | ≈ 40°. ASs
for extremes are correlated with the antenna HPBWs. Values of
αR corresponding the maximum increases slightly with the
increase of HPBW and basically does not depend on the

Jan M. Kelner, Cezary Ziółkowski, and Bogdan Uljasz,
“Comparison of angular spread for 6 and 60 GHz based on 3GPP standard,”
in 2018 22nd International Microwave and Radar Conference (MIKON),
Poznan, Poland, 15–17.05.2018., pp. 1–5.

frequency. For | αR | > 60°, ASs stabilize at a constant level and
are amount to 10.3°, 6.2°, 9.3°, and 4.6° for (A)–(D),
respectively. Thus, these values are equal to about half of the
antenna HPBW.

Fig. 6. Comparision AS versus αR for αT = 180°, f0 equal 60 GHz and 6 GHz.

For other orientations of the antenna (A) type, changes of
AS versus αT and αR are shown in Figs. 7 and 8, respectively.

systems. in this context, the knowledge of statistic properties
of AOA plays a important role in the development of antenna
arrays and radio resource management in the 5G systems. Most
of available propagation models do not consider the directional
antenna patterns. The proposed multi-elliptical model gives
such opportunity. The carried out simulations show that the
directional antennas significantly reduce the angular dispersion
in the received signals. Therefore, including them to analyze
modern communication systems is very important.
The purpose of the simulation studies was the comparative
assessment of AS for 6 and 60 GHz. In these studies, the multielliptical propagation model, 3GPP standard and parameters of
real antennas were used. Based on the obtained results, we
could conclude that the influence of the frequency on the
angular dispersion is visible only for the receiving antenna with
the omnidirectional or sectoral wide-beam pattern. In the case
of the narrow-beam directional antennas, the Rx antenna
pattern ensures "spatial filtration" of the received signals.
However, it should be remembered that simultaneously, this
reduces the powers of the received signal components reaching
from other directions. Additionally, the change of the receiving
antenna direction affects the change of AS to a greater extent
than the change of the transmitting antenna direction.
REFERENCES
M. Failli, “COST 207. Digital land mobile radio communications,”
Commission of the European Communities, Directorate-General
Telecommunications, Information Industries and Innovation,
Luxembourg City, Luxembourg, Final report COST 207 (1984.03.14.1988.09.13), 1989.
[2] “WINNER II channel models,” IST-WINNER II, Tech. Rep.
Deliverable 1.1.2 v.1.2., Sep. 2007.
[3] “3GPP TR 25.996 v13.1.0 (2016-12). Spatial channel model for multiple
input multiple output (MIMO) simulations (Release 13),” 3rd
Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), Technical Specification Group
Radio Access Network, Valbonne, France, Tech. Rep. 3GPP TR 25.996
v13.1.0, Dec. 2016.
[4] “3GPP TR 38.901 V14.2.0 (2017-09). Study on channel model for
frequencies from 0.5 to 100 GHz (Release 14),” 3rd Generation
Partnership Project (3GPP), Technical Specification Group Radio
Access Network, Valbonne, France, Tech. Rep. 3GPP TR 38.901
V14.2.0, Sep. 2017.
[5] R. Vannithamby and S. Talwar, Eds., Towards 5G: Applications,
requirements and candidate technologies. Chichester, West Sussex,
United Kingdom: Wiley, 2017.
[6] T. L. Marzetta, E. G. Larsson, H. Yang, and H. Q. Ngo, Fundamentals
of massive MIMO. Cambridge, United Kingdom ; New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2016.
[7] A. Taira et al., “Performance evaluation of 44GHz band massive MIMO
based on channel measurement,” in 2015 IEEE Globecom Workshops
(GC Wkshps), 2015, pp. 1–6.
[8] W. Liu and S. Weiss, Wideband beamforming: Concepts and techniques.
Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley, 2010.
[9] Y. Yang, J. Xu, G. Shi, and C.-X. Wang, 5G wireless systems:
Simulation and evaluation techniques. New York, NY, USA: Springer,
2017.
[10] K. I. Pedersen, P. E. Mogensen, and B. H. Fleury, “A stochastic model
of the temporal and azimuthal dispersion seen at the base station in
outdoor propagation environments,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 49,
no. 2, pp. 437–447, Mar. 2000.
[11] C. Ziółkowski and J. M. Kelner, “Empirical models of the azimuthal
reception angle—Part II: Adaptation of the empirical models in
analytical and simulation studies,” Wirel. Pers. Commun., vol. 91, no. 3,
pp. 1285–1296, Dec. 2016.
[1]

Fig. 7. AS versus αT for antenna (A), f0 = 60 GHz, and selected αR.

Fig. 8. AS versus αR for antenna (A), f0 = 60 GHz, and selected αT.

Based on the obtained graphs, the analysis of the angular
dispersion is very difficult. However, we can draw general
conclusions. On the one hand, the change of αT has a smaller
impact on the increase of AS than the change of αR. On the
other hand, for a fixed αT, AS stabilizes above some αR, which
is about 100° for HPBW < 20°.
IV. CONCLUSION
New antenna techniques like MIMO, massive MIMO
APAA, and beamforming are the basis of the emerging 5G

Jan M. Kelner, Cezary Ziółkowski, and Bogdan Uljasz,
“Comparison of angular spread for 6 and 60 GHz based on 3GPP standard,”
in 2018 22nd International Microwave and Radar Conference (MIKON),
Poznan, Poland, 15–17.05.2018., pp. 1–5.

[12] J. M. Kelner and C. Ziółkowski, “Modeling power angle spectrum and
antenna pattern directions in multipath propagation environment,” in
2018 12th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation
(EUCAP), London, UK, 2018, pp. 1–5.
[13] J. D. Parsons and A. S. Bajwa, “Wideband characterisation of fading
mobile radio channels,” IEE Proc. F Commun. Radar Signal Process.,
vol. 129, no. 2, pp. 95–101, Apr. 1982.
[14] C. Ziółkowski and J. M. Kelner, “Geometry-based statistical model for
the temporal, spectral, and spatial characteristics of the land mobile
channel,” Wirel. Pers. Commun., vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 631–652, Jul. 2015.
[15] C. Ziółkowski, “Statistical model of the angular power distribution for
wireless multipath environments,” IET Microw. Antennas Propag., vol.
9, no. 3, pp. 281–289, Feb. 2015.
[16] C. Ziółkowski and J. M. Kelner, “Estimation of the reception angle
distribution based on the power delay spectrum or profile,” Int. J.
Antennas Propag., vol. 2015, p. e936406, Dec. 2015.
[17] A. Abdi, J. A. Barger, and M. Kaveh, “A parametric model for the
distribution of the angle of arrival and the associated correlation function
and power spectrum at the mobile station,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.,
vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 425–434, May 2002.
[18] C. Ziółkowski and J. M. Kelner, “Antenna pattern in three-dimensional
modelling of the arrival angle in simulation studies of wireless

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

channels,” IET Microw. Antennas Propag., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 898–906,
May 2017.
C. Ziółkowski and J. M. Kelner, “Statistical evaluation of the azimuth
and elevation angles seen at the output of the receiving antenna,” IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 66, 2018.
R. Vaughan and J. Bach Andersen, Channels, propagation and antennas
for mobile communications. London, UK: Institution of Engineering and
Technology, 2003.
C. Ziółkowski, J. M. Kelner, L. Nowosielski, and M. Wnuk, “Modeling
the distribution of the arrival angle based on transmitter antenna
pattern,” in 2017 11th European Conference on Antennas and
Propagation (EUCAP), Paris, France, 2017, pp. 1582–1586.
T. S. Rappaport, G. R. MacCartney, M. K. Samimi, and S. Sun,
“Wideband millimeter-wave propagation measurements and channel
models for future wireless communication system design,” IEEE Trans.
Commun., vol. 63, no. 9, pp. 3029–3056, Sep. 2015.
“60 GHz WR-15 antennas,” Pasternack. The engineer’s RF source.
[Online].
Available:
https://www.pasternack.com/pages/Featured_Products/60-ghz-wr-15antennas.html. [Accessed: 29-Jan-2018].
“Microwave horns, antenna,” AR World. RF/microwave instrumentation.
[Online].
Available:
https://www.arworld.us/html/13100.asp?S=3.
[Accessed: 29-Jan-2018].

Jan M. Kelner, Cezary Ziółkowski, and Bogdan Uljasz,
“Comparison of angular spread for 6 and 60 GHz based on 3GPP standard,”
in 2018 22nd International Microwave and Radar Conference (MIKON),
Poznan, Poland, 15–17.05.2018., pp. 1–5.

