In a comparative analysis the performance and capacity of DECT, PACS, and PHS for WLL applications have been investigated. This article reports the results of both qualitative and quantitative analysis. The qualitative evaluation consists of a detailed comparison of the parameters of each standard and their relevance in WLL applications. In the quantitative analysis detailed simulations have been performed covering diversified sets of conditions. The results of both types of analysis are presented. A major conclusion is that all three standards provide satisfactory performance for WLL applications. For low-traffic environments PACS, which can employ larger cells, performs better than the other two standards. In suburban areas where, in addition to coverage, capacity is an issue, DECT has better performance. For high-traffic-density urban areas with great capacity requirements all three standards have good performance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Momtahan et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: