Techs & Trends
Measuring Phone Reception
Sigh.
I feel almost certain I'm wasting people's time, network bandwidth, and electricity, but I've got to ask:
Is there a way to compare the reception on different phones yet?
Good reception has got to be at the top of a lot of people's list when they're searching for a cell phone, yet comparing phone reception is something I'm finding impossible!
There must be a dozen technical specs that could be scientifically tested, published, and when all of them were considered, you should have some good guess as to how good the reception is on a particular model.
But no one seems to publish any of these specs.
How could such a crucial feature of cell phones be so hard to find?
A year ago Rich Brome himself pretty well sai...
(continues)
I feel almost certain I'm wasting people's time, network bandwidth, and electricity, but I've got to ask:
Is there a way to compare the reception on different phones yet?
Good reception has got to be at the top of a lot of people's list when they're searching for a cell phone, yet comparing phone reception is something I'm finding impossible!
There must be a dozen technical specs that could be scientifically tested, published, and when all of them were considered, you should have some good guess as to how good the reception is on a particular model.
But no one seems to publish any of these specs.
How could such a crucial feature of cell phones be so hard to find?
A year ago Rich Brome himself pretty well sai...
(continues)
...
Rich Brome is exactly correct. There are SO MANY factors that weigh in on "good reception" that it is nearly impossible to test for everything.
The best way to test the sensitivity of a receiver is to place the handset in an absolute anechoic chamber that completely isolates all outside RF from entering. then connect the handset to a Spirent "super bench" that will test receiver sensitivty on every single channel of all the bands that handset supports.
But guess what!! You still haven't solved the problem. As Rich pointed out, when a handset is in the weakest signal strength, it has to transmit at maximum power. That requires a LOT of shielding at a very wide spectrum of frequenecies. Many handsets on certain channels have self-interf...
(continues)
The best way to test the sensitivity of a receiver is to place the handset in an absolute anechoic chamber that completely isolates all outside RF from entering. then connect the handset to a Spirent "super bench" that will test receiver sensitivty on every single channel of all the bands that handset supports.
But guess what!! You still haven't solved the problem. As Rich pointed out, when a handset is in the weakest signal strength, it has to transmit at maximum power. That requires a LOT of shielding at a very wide spectrum of frequenecies. Many handsets on certain channels have self-interf...
(continues)
...
Important note: I am talking completely out of my ass. I've never seen some of these terms before and taking some wild guesses at what they probably mean.
Of those 3 test scenarios, only the antenna radiation chamber could ever be of any use whatsoever.
Taking the antenna out of the equation makes it pointless and the great outdoors has way too many variables to compare multiple phones over the course of days and years.
It seems like you could throw additional antennas into that chamber to test multi-pathing.
Oh-good-grief the number of combinations there'd be then to test against!
Talk to antenna 1 at 1800 MHz and antenna 2 at 1801 MHz, then do antenna 1 at 1800 MHz and antenna 2 at 1802 MHz, etc.
And of course you need t...
(continues)
Of those 3 test scenarios, only the antenna radiation chamber could ever be of any use whatsoever.
Taking the antenna out of the equation makes it pointless and the great outdoors has way too many variables to compare multiple phones over the course of days and years.
It seems like you could throw additional antennas into that chamber to test multi-pathing.
Oh-good-grief the number of combinations there'd be then to test against!
Talk to antenna 1 at 1800 MHz and antenna 2 at 1801 MHz, then do antenna 1 at 1800 MHz and antenna 2 at 1802 MHz, etc.
And of course you need t...
(continues)
...
A rack of Spirent equipment to test in a radiation chamber can run you something in the order of $60,000-$120,000, and that's before you've paid for the chamber itself. The chamber itself, albeit I don't know the exact price, is absolutely ridiculous, something in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. All told, you're looking at costs approaching the $1M mark. And if the phone manufacturers choose not to pay you your testing fees for the risk that their results come out worst than the next guy, then you've got all this investment in equipment with no income.
In 99.9% of all drop calls, a handset has more than one "base station" (Actually PN's) in it's active set. That means that in most cases, when a handset does drop a call, it is seeing...
(continues)
In 99.9% of all drop calls, a handset has more than one "base station" (Actually PN's) in it's active set. That means that in most cases, when a handset does drop a call, it is seeing...
(continues)
...
I know this is going to sound really weird and counter-intuitive, but...
I really don't think it's that's important.
If you buy a phone from a carrier, the carrier has done these kinds of tests on it already, and it has met some standard of reception ability that they have. Certainly they don't all have the same standard, but my point is a phone with truly crappy RF just isn't going to make the cut.
There are still differences, but when do they really come into play? In decent signal areas, any half-decent phone will do just fine, in terms of RF reception.
It's really only in fringe areas that it's an issue. Most people don't spend enough time in fringe areas for it to be a major issue for them. Don't get me wrong, I know ...
(continues)
I really don't think it's that's important.
If you buy a phone from a carrier, the carrier has done these kinds of tests on it already, and it has met some standard of reception ability that they have. Certainly they don't all have the same standard, but my point is a phone with truly crappy RF just isn't going to make the cut.
There are still differences, but when do they really come into play? In decent signal areas, any half-decent phone will do just fine, in terms of RF reception.
It's really only in fringe areas that it's an issue. Most people don't spend enough time in fringe areas for it to be a major issue for them. Don't get me wrong, I know ...
(continues)
...
> One problem is, who pays for it?
This reminds me of a "get-rich-quick" story I've heard coming from Dalton, GA.
They make a lot of carpet in Dalton.
A lot.
The story goes that some entrepreneurial type did some carpet testing for this one company there and then expanded just a bit and did some tests for the another company.
One thing lead to another and getting high scores on his tests became a really sought after.
And all the carpet co.'s in Dalton started using him for that and he basically ended up making a market for himself and ended up heading some well off carpet-testing company.
No idea if a bit of that's true or not :-)
But this situation reminds me of it.
As for the "How do you quantify it for people to understan...
(continues)
This reminds me of a "get-rich-quick" story I've heard coming from Dalton, GA.
They make a lot of carpet in Dalton.
A lot.
The story goes that some entrepreneurial type did some carpet testing for this one company there and then expanded just a bit and did some tests for the another company.
One thing lead to another and getting high scores on his tests became a really sought after.
And all the carpet co.'s in Dalton started using him for that and he basically ended up making a market for himself and ended up heading some well off carpet-testing company.
No idea if a bit of that's true or not :-)
But this situation reminds me of it.
As for the "How do you quantify it for people to understan...
(continues)
...
Exactly!! Very well put, Rich!!
If you were to look at a graph of "Receiver Sensitivity" where, in the Y-axis you have Signal Strength, and the X-axis you have frequencies, you could plot two different phones on the same graph. The lines will come out looking VERY wavey as they progress over the x-axis. So where as one phone may perform well at channel 384 (CDMA Cell Band), it may be horrible at channel 630 (CDMA Cell Band). Now throw PCS on top of that, and once again, you get the same graph. So how do you make the judgement call on which is better when the lines are fluctuating around each other? It's nearly impossible to, as Rich put it, put a 1-10 scale to it. It's just not linear.
If you were to look at a graph of "Receiver Sensitivity" where, in the Y-axis you have Signal Strength, and the X-axis you have frequencies, you could plot two different phones on the same graph. The lines will come out looking VERY wavey as they progress over the x-axis. So where as one phone may perform well at channel 384 (CDMA Cell Band), it may be horrible at channel 630 (CDMA Cell Band). Now throw PCS on top of that, and once again, you get the same graph. So how do you make the judgement call on which is better when the lines are fluctuating around each other? It's nearly impossible to, as Rich put it, put a 1-10 scale to it. It's just not linear.
...
Don't know of ways to measure phone reception..but Motorola does a good job with the antenna/RF/Reception issue...At least with their older phones...
...
