A recap of the PCTEL webinar hosted by NEDAS on December 7, 2017
-
Upload
ilissa-miller -
Category
Technology
-
view
39 -
download
0
Transcript of A recap of the PCTEL webinar hosted by NEDAS on December 7, 2017
February 2018 - NEDAS DC Symposium
May 9, 2018 - NEDAS Chicago Social *NEW*
July 18, 2018 - NEDAS Boston Symposium
September 6, 2018 - NEDAS NYC Summit
NEDAS 2018 Events
Save the Date!
NEDAS Annual Sponsorships now available! Expand and grow your business in
2018 by becoming a NEDAS Annual Sponsor and let us help you reach your
goals. For more information, contact: [email protected].
Jason ChambersCSM & CPM Service Manager
David AdamsSenior Product Manager
Presented By
&
Assuring Critical Communications for Public Safety: Supporting the Effort to Verify Indoor Network Performance
David Adams, Senior Product Manager, PCTEL
Assuring Critical Communications for Public Safety: Supporting the Effort to Verify Indoor
Network Performance
Jason Chambers, Service Manager , Day Wireless Systems - SeaTac
Presented by PCTEL and Day Wireless Systems
Demands for assuring Public Safety “in building” network coverage is growing rapidly. The leading PS agencies have strict
requirements for testing and demonstrating satisfactory performance.
New cost-effective tools are required to enable organizations to meet these requirements.
● Public Safety network coverage requirements
● Key challenges to putting requirements in place and enforcing
them and effective solutions to overcome these challenges
● Case study of successfully assuring performance
Introduction and Agenda
○ Day Wireless Systems (DWS)-Advises AHJ’s on Fire
Codes
○ Balancing PS Radio System Requirements w/Fire Code
○ Local Fire Codes; Fire Code Adoption vs Local
Amendments
○ Differences in Coverage Testing Requirements
○ Educating AHJ’s and Building Owners
○ Compliance Testing Challenges
PS Network Coverage Requirements
Introduction
DWS Support for AHJ Amendments
○ Staying current with adopted Fire Codes & Amendments
○ Understanding adopted Fire Code (IFC 2015 and/or
NFPA-72)
○ Understanding how PS Radio Network operates
○ Implications amendments and compliance have on 1st
Responders
○ Implications amendments and compliance have on
building owners
PS Network Coverage Requirements
AHJ Amendments to Fire Codes
○ DWS SeaTac Maintains 1 of 4 Public Safety Radio Networks
○ Governmental agencies may not be on the same page
○ Simulcast Sites & Interoperability with other agencies
○ Channelized vs Non-Channelized systems (in code)
○ Isolation testing required by PS Radio System Managers not
Fire Code
○ Coverage Testing Requirements:
Donor agencies & uplink testing
Fire Code: uplink & downlink testing requirements
PS Network Coverage Requirements
Radio Requirements vs. Fire Code
○ Which Fire Code are enforced locally for ERRS? May not be the same as FACPs or Sprinkler System
○ Blended Fire Code Requirements (IFC, NFPA and/or Local)
○ Compliance Requirements for Coverage Testing 20-Grid, 40-Grid, NFPA-72, other? Residences waived in certain jurisdictions for Annual
Recertification Critical Areas defined & enforced? What is the “Spirit of Intent” in the Fire Code?
○ Know the code!
PS Network Coverage Requirements
Code Adoption vs Local Amendments
○ Each AHJ can have stark differences in requirements
○ New Construction, Retro-Fit and Annual Recertification
○ What’s required by AHJ’s Fire Code and/or City Permitting? 20-Grid, 40-Grid, Baseline/Benchmark/Organic? Critical Areas? Donor Signal Strength? Voice Quality?
○ Fire Code/Permitting different than contract requirements? Common w/ Voice Quality Test in Greater Seattle Area
○ Is the technician qualified & equipped for the requirements?
○ Does the tech know the code they are testing against?
PS Network Coverage Requirements
Differences in Testing Requirements
○ Technicians, AHJ’s & Building Owners staying current
○ AHJ’s rarely notify Building Owners on changes to Fire Code
○ Fire Inspectors not always stay up to date on Local Fire
Code
○ “AHJ Walkthroughs” can turn into education opportunities
○ “AHJ Walkthroughs” w/ customer & technicians important
PS Network Coverage Requirements
Educating AHJ’s and Building Owners
○ Access to residential or restricted areas
○ Service Provider the bearer of bad news
○ Certification for resources (equipment & personnel)
○ Shaping data to make sense for AHJ & customer
PS Network Coverage Requirements
Compliance Testing Challenges
What are the key challenges to putting requirements in
place and enforcing them?
What is required in an effective solution?
Illustrated with PCTEL’s Solution: SeeHawk Touch and
IBflex Scanner
Key Challenges / Effective Solutions
Introduction
IBflex®
Key Challenges / Effective Solutions
Introduction
Fragmented Test Requirements
○ Differences between the leading organizations
○ How the AHJ’s are adopting and adapting
○ Many entities influencing the requirements
Solution Requirements
○ Wide flexibility to configure test and reporting to cover the
range of differing requirements
○ Accommodate the approach of power level and voice
Multiple networks, architectures on various bands
Testing services
impacted by a
range of
organizations and
sources of
requirements
Key Challenges / Effective Solutions
Introduction
High Time to Complete
○ Test preparation, execution and report
generation are all manual and time
consuming
○ Cost of “delayed” determination of
pass/fail
Solution Requirements
○ Each phase needs to be automated =
efficient and easy
○ Clear understanding of the performance
at the end
○ Real time report updates during
execution
Icon Description
Run measurement
Add grid
Edit grid
‘Do not test’ area
Move test points in area
Add critical points
Add reference points
Key Challenges / Effective Solutions
Introduction
Inefficient Use of Personnel
○ Manual process requires multiple people
○ Utilizes higher levels of experience and skill
Solution Requirements
○ Test execution kept simple for fewer, less skilled testers
○ Reports generated automatically
○ Higher level of skill to “adapt” the setup and report
Point/click for test to run
Results
displayed,
reports
update on
each test
Key Challenges / Effective Solutions
Introduction
Getting the Right Test Tools
○ Accurate and fast measurements
○ Multiple functions in a single tool – fewer tools
○ Multiple bands/channels/technologies in single test
Solution Requirements
○ Measurement device designed for purpose
○ Spectrum analysis “built in” for trouble shooting and tests –
fewer pieces of equipment to maintain, carry and use.
Indoor Grid and Walk, Outdoor Drive, Signal Analysis
Key Challenges / Effective Solutions
Introduction
Ineffective collaboration with the “DAS solution” designer
○ Field personnel rarely have design tool experience or access
○ Design info is “print outs”
○ Little coordination to return measurements and results
Solution Requirements
○ Leverage all design info for “in the field” activities
○ Tight integration between measurement tool and design tool
4. Analyze,
Refine Design
SeeHawk Touch
Design file to
tablet1. Design 2. Test
3. Return ResultsiBWave Complete
data returned
Key Challenges / Effective Solutions
Introduction
Advantages of an Effective Solution vs. Manual
○ Automated setup, test and report
○ Fast, simultaneous, accurate measurements
○ Consistency in the measurement and methodology
○ Ergonomics – light, discrete, etc.
○ Cost effective use of personnel
○ Future proof
○ Robust development roadmap that is “customer driven”
○ System Description
○ Testing Requirements
○ Two (2 Tunnels): Former Method & PCTEL Equipment
○ Man-Hour Consumption
○ Accuracy of Data
○ Post Processing
Tunnel Coverage Test Case Study
Introduction
System to be Tested
○ Two “Sister” Tunnels w/ three lanes of traffic per tunnel
○ Two independent Public Safety BDA/DAS fed by 5 Donors
○ Baseline & Fire Code Compliance required for each system
Test Execution Streamlined
○ Tunnel Coverage Testing is challenging! Tunnel #1: 3 Techs & 5 test devices per shift (2 shifts)
Required lane closures on major highways 36 man-hours consumed for On-Site Coverage Testing Manual recording of 600 signal levels (handwritten) for test grids
Tunnel #2: 2 Techs & 1 PCTEL Test Suite (1 Shift) 1 Shift with NO lane closures required Safety vehicles & personnel (lead/trail) not required ($$’s saved) 7 man-hours consumed for On-Site Coverage Testing 600 signal levels auto-recorded for test grids
Tunnel Coverage Test Case Study
System and Test Description
Post Processing of Data for Report Generation Simplified
○ Tunnel#1: 20 administrative man-hours Quality of data & reporting met Fire Code & Contract req’s
○ Tunnel#2: 8.5 administrative man-hours Quality of data & reporting EXCEEDED Fire Code & Contract
req’s
BENEFITS
○ Efficiencies Gained & Time Saved! Total time savings: 72% (15.5 vs. 56 hours)
○ Increased accuracy through automation
Happy AHJ = Relieved Customer!
Tunnel Coverage Test Case Study
End Results
Questions?
For your test solution needs, contact PCTEL
http://rfsolutions.pctel.com/
For your public safety design and test services needs, contact
Day Wireless Systems
http://www.daywireless.com/
Conclusion