# Radio Network Forensic with mmWave Using the Dominant Path Algorithm

Authors: Usman Rauf Kamboh; Muhammad Rehman Shahid; Hamza Aldabbas; Ammar Rafiq; Bader Alouffi; Muhammad Asif Habib; Ubaid Ullah
Journal: Security and Communication Networks
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

For the last two decades, cybercrimes are growing on a daily basis. To track down cybercrimes and radio network crimes, digital forensic for radio networks provides foundations. The data transfer rate for the next-generation wireless networks would be much greater than today’s network in the coming years. The fifth-generation wireless systems are considering bands beyond 6 GHz. The network design of the next-generation wireless systems depends on propagation characteristics, frequency reuse, and bandwidth variation. This article declares the channel’s propagation characteristics of both line of sight (LoS) and non-LOS (NLoS) to construct and detect the path of rays coming from anomalies. The simulations were carried out to investigate the diffraction loss (DL) and frequency drop (FD). Indoor and outdoor measurements were taken with the omnidirectional circular dipole antenna with a transmitting frequency of 28 GHz and 60 GHz to compare the two bands of the 5th generation. Millimeter-wave communication comes with a higher constraint for implementing and deploying higher losses, low diffractions, and low signal penetrations for the mentioned two bands. For outdoor, a MATLAB built-in 3D ray tracing algorithm is used while for an indoor office environment, an in-house algorithmic simulator built using MATLAB is used to analyze the channel characteristics.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Present research work in the field of network forensic is on traditional networks. Because of the emergence of cellular or radio networks, radio network forensic provides the platform to investigate, capture, and detect faults, illegal activities, and cybercrimes [1].Figure1 illustrates the investigation process for digital forensic. The DFRWS model begins from identifying the crime. This identification is further divided to different tasks, for example, signature resolving, system monitoring, analysis, profile detection, complaints, and anomalous detection. The next step is the preservations. In preservations, we need to set up case management, management of the technology, insurance of custody chain, and synchronizing the time element. In the third step, data are collected by following the approved methodology. Examination is the fourth stage in DFWS. In examination, data are examined. Then, the data are analyzed, and tracing of evidences, validation of data, and filtering of data begin. In the presentation stage, we document the evidence, and final decision is taken. Frequencies greater than sub-6 GHz are not properly utilized in digital forensics due to which mmWave provides much greater bandwidth than the existing ones. On the one hand, higher-frequency bands (e.g., mmWave bands) are not heavily utilized and, thus, offer larger bandwidths for wireless communication systems. Hence, determinations are focused upon the discovery of advanced frequencies as an alternate to the sub-6 GHz band [2]. On the other hand, the performance of the wireless communication system (WCS) is affected by multipath fading. As a matter of fact, the mobile device and the router for WCS have to cope up multipath manifestations which in other words demand deep knowledge of the propagation channel [3]. The designers of radio coverage make use of path loss prediction models and other channel parameters to deploy and install access points in an environment for the sake of better coverage and through put [4]. This work deals with extensive measurements, modeling, ray tracing, and simulations of channel characteristics in open outdoor as well as in narrow corridor and institution room environment. The frequency bands considered for the WCS modeling are 28 GHz and 60 GHz. We rationally premeditated received signal strength (RSS) by the principle of the “five rays” and “two rays” receiving power model.Figure 1
Investigative process for digital forensic science (DFRWS).To associate proposed model systematic results, simulations and measurements were performed at The University of Faisalabad, Faisalabad, Pakistan. The experimental campaign is shown in Figure2(a). The outdoor scenario is shown in Figure 2(b). The transmitter indicated in red is roughly 250 m apart from the receiver shown in blue. The remaining part of the article is described as follows. A summary of the recent related work and the contribution are discussed in Section 2. Section 3 deals with the path loss modeling for both outdoor as well as indoor environment. Section 4 deals with the ray tracing modeling. Section 5 analyzes the detailed simulations and algorithm for the smart ray tracing algorithm. Finally in Section 6, we draw conclusion.Figure 2
Measurement environment. (a) Indoor setup [5]. (b) Aerial view.
(a)(b)


## 2. Recent Studies and Contributions

Numerous tactics are suggested in the literature to control the extraordinary attenuation issue on mmWave frequency bands [6, 7]. In [8, 9], the authors indicated that increment in the directivity or gain of the concerned antennas can be beneficial in high attenuation problems. Table 1 illustrates the recent findings in the field of mmWave. The model used, geometry, scenario, carrier frequency, and separation between the transmitter and receiver are mentioned against each reference. Another aspect is the material characteristics of the environment [32]. The need for ray tracing comes here as the indoor and outdoor environment difference in geometry so is the LoS and NLoS for numerous frequency bands. Ray tracing is used to model the propagation characteristics [33–36].Table 1
Recent studies.
ReferenceModel usedGeometryScenarioAntenna patternFrequency (GHz)Tx-Rx (m)[10]Emp.NLoSSuburbanDirect28Unspecified[11]RTNLoSOpenedUnspecifiedUnspecifiedUnspecifiedSquared[12]Emp.LoS/NLoSIndoorDirect19, 28, 3818[13]Emp.LoS/NLoSIndoorOmni3.520[14]Emp.LoSOutdoorDirect./Omni3.5450[15]Emp.LoS/NLoSOutdoorHorn/Omni28, 3830Campus[16]Emp.LoS/NLoSIndoorOmni403[17]RTLoS/NLoSIndoorHorn60Unspecified[18]Emp.NLoSI2ODipole19, 28, 3813.5[19]Emp.LoS/NLoSIndoorHorn3.5, 2820[20]Emp.LoS/NLoSIndoorHorn3.520[21]Emp.LoS/NLoSIndoorOmni310, 350, 3900.7[22]Emp.LoS/NLoSOutdoorHorn3850[23]Emp.LoSIndoorOmni25.5, 38,37.5, 39.58.5[24]Emp.LoSIndoorOmni2.4, 3.52,5.84[25]Emp.LoSOutdoorDirectUnspecified28[26]RTLoS/NLoSOpenedUnspecifiedUnspecifiedUnspecifiedSquared[27]RTLoSIndoorIsotropic28Unspecified[28]7 RTLoS/NLoSIndoorOmni28Unspecified[29]RTLoS/NLoSOutdoorOmni28Unspecified[30]Emp. and RTLoSIndoorEmp. Horn2822.73D Direct.[31]3D RTLoS/NLoSOutdoorDipole28488This study3D RTLoS/NLoSOutdoorOmni/Horn28, 60See Tables3 and 4CampusA separate ray source is presented in this article for end-to-end penetration. We considered five rays for indoor and five for outdoor. In indoor, we analyzed one ray for LoS and the rest of four for the wall, ground, and ceiling of the room. All the five rays considered to be contributing in received and illustrated with different colors. These remain because of the small separation between transmitter and receiver antennas. The reflected rays are excluded by Rx because of the directivity pattern. The high fresnel reflection coefficients are organised with reference to the radio links. An escalation in the RSS was spotted as compared to outdoors. The path loss for the outdoor open environment has greater slope than that for indoor.Normally, two ray models are deliberated for outdoors because of their nature of modelingPr in an unavailability scenario of 1st order reflections. Thus, no concrete solid evidence of the difference is found between PL slopes. At last, the calculated modeling is compared with experimental parameters and RT simulations. We also prepared a reasonable investigation of the measurements with 5-ray and 2-ray investigative models, and RT simulations with 5 rays are delivered for the indoor office environment.In Figure3(a), the probability of dipole antenna for the proposed model is marginal with the theoretical values. This indicates that the probability of dipole decreases with the increase in path loss. Additionally, the probability for close-in and 3GPP models deviates from the theoretical model. Figure 3(b) indicates the reactance and resistance of the dipole antenna. It is evident from the graph that the reactance and resistance are opposite to each other. The above recent literature when compared with our proposed work points out the following differences:(i)
Five dominant rays for indoor and two dominant rays for outdoor were adequate considering this work.(ii)
The distance of rays was considered to be resolvable when compared with LoS. Smaller is the distance of resolution and the rays superimposed on one another.(iii)
At 28 GHz and 60 GHz, a polarized dependent variable was utilized.(iv)
The close deployment of Tx and Rx is very common in indoor scenarios nowadays. This scenario with a typical classroom environment is focused here.(v)
Antenna gains for Tx and Rx are closely monitored with the help of MATLAB simulations using antenna radiation patterns.Figure 3
Circular dipole antenna characteristics. (a)Probability density of dipole antenna for different models; (b)resistance and reactance of dipole antenna.
(a)(b)


## 3. Path Loss Modeling

Figure4 is taken from the recent studies conducted by authors to ray trace the path loss in a different environment with heatmap techniques using MATLAB Simulink. The close-in (CI) free-space path loss model is utilized to adjust the path loss from the result of simulations. The supremacy of CI is that its parameters are dependent on the operating frequency. The relationship of PL with frequency for CI is as follows [37]:(1)PLCIddB=FSPLf,d0+10n.logdd0+XσSFCI.Figure 4
Recent related work [32]. (a) 1st reflection; (b) 2nd reflection; (c) heap map of outdoor simulations.
(a)(b)(c)XσSFCI denotes the standard deviation. FSPLf,d0 represents the free-space path loss in dB and is given by(2)FSPLf,d0=20log104πd0fc,where d0 is the Tx-Rx separation at 1 m reference; f stands for the frequency of the carrier radio wave; c denotes the light speed, and n is the path loss exponent (PLE). In [38], WINNER II and 3GPP are illustrated with the help of floating intercept (FI). According to [38], FI is expressed as follows:(3)PLFIddB=α+10βlog10d+YσSFFI,where σSF of YσSFFI is the Gaussian SF. Multifrequency path loss models are used for a variety of mmWaves. For this aspect, the famous alpha-beta-gamma (ABG) model with a 1 m reference distance and 1 GHz referred frequency is considered here as follows [39]:(4)PLABGf,ddB=10α.logdd0+10γ.logffref+β+XσABG.In the above equation,α and γ denote constant coefficients. β denotes the offset, and XσABG is a Gaussian random variable. In literature [40], ABG is solved with the help of MMSE to minimize error.Another derived model from CI and FSPL which is widely used for path loss analysis is CIF (Close in free space) [38]:(5)PLCIFf,ddB=10m.log10d0.1+g.f−f0f0+XσCIF,where m and g are the distance dependent and linear frequency dependent factors, respectively.


## 4. RT Modeling

Ray tracing involves two patterns. (a) ray launch and (b) the image theory. In the first line of attack, rays commencing Tx are launched with even angular departure and then traced. After tracing the rays, the received field will be calculated to find the power [41–43]. This approach has faster computational time but has less accuracy when the separation increases. An alternate approach as mentioned is the image method, in which the route is first defined of image points from Tx or Rx [41, 43]. This method of images has a drawback of high computational time and involves complex algorithms. The interaction mechanism implements propagation’s theory; nonetheless, the deviation through different RT tools occurs due to the dissimilar method of modeling the similar phenomena (e.g., diffraction, diffusion, scattering, and reflection). Other deviations follow in the antenna design, pattern, sources, frequencies, and models. The constitutive material aspects, e.g., the magnetic permeability μ, electrical permittivity ϵ, and the conductivity ρ, are essentials for accomplishing accurate channel estimations in RT [44]. Undeniably, Maxwell’s electromagnetic wave equations for diverse edges are fighting fit for constitutive parameters. This directly affects the wave’s phase and amplitude, therefore, eventually governs the influence of discrete multipath constituents. The influence of “material properties” on the RT estimations precision depends on the dominant propagation.Accordingly, in situations wherever the LoS dominates, material properties can affect very little on the accuracy of the prediction algorithm. The modeling of diffused scatterings is usually carried out with the help of severe roughness models as proposed in literature [45]. Because the model is not dependent on the Maxwell equation, it solves the issue of diffused component’s power. Besides, the roughness model is not dependent on the material properties; it can predict a diffuse scattered field. Fresnel’s equation works on smooth surfaces for the analysis of reflection coefficients and transmission coefficients. The reflection coefficient for the smooth surface is given by [32](6)τ⊥=e⊥re⊥i=η1Secθt−η0Secθtη1Secθt+η0Secθt,In the above equation,e⊥i denotes the incident electric fields, θi represents the incident angles, e⊥r expresses the reflected electric fields, η is the wave impedance, and θr declares the transmission’s angle. The transmission coefficients are denoted by(7)t⊥=e⊥te⊥i=2η1secθtη1secθi+η0secθt,t∥=e∥te∥i=2η1secθtη0secθi+η1secθt.The constitutive parameters of the used materials will determine the impedance of the wave (η) and the also the angle of transmission θt:(8)η=ιΩμρ+ιΩϵ,θr=cos−11−p0p12sinθt2,where Ω stands for the angular frequency and p denotes the wave number for that frequency.(9)Ω=2πf,p=Ωμϵ−ιμρΩ.More accurate results for diffracted wedges can be obtained by using the “Uniform Theory of Diffraction” (UTD). For UTD, the details of material constitutive parameter are necessary to be determined. Considering Figure5, the diffraction coefficient can be obtained by [46](10)D∥⊥=−e−ιπ/42∗p2πp×Di1+Di2+t∥,0⊥Di3+t∥,p⊥Di4,where(11)Di1=1tanπ+Ψ−Ψ′/2p.YvLb+Ψ−Ψ′,Di2=1tanπ−Ψ−Ψ′/2p.YvLb−Ψ−Ψ′,Di3=1tanπ−Ψ−Ψ′/2p.YvLb−Ψ−Ψ′,Di4=1tanπ−Ψ−Ψ′/2p.YvLb+Ψ−Ψ′,where Ψ ' is the incidence angle and Ψ is the diffraction angle; the Fresnel integral Yv can be expressed as follows:(12)Yv=2jveιv∫v∞e−ιτ2.Figure 5
Dominant ray tracing concept [32].L is defined as follows:(13)L=ss′s+s′.Figure5 explains that n represents the wedge’s factor, and s and s′ are the distances. a± is defined as follows:(14)a±Ψ±Ψ′=2×1−sin22nΨM±−Ψ±Ψ′2.Finally,M± are the integers of the following equations:(15)2nπM+−Ψ±Ψ′=π,2nπM−−Ψ±Ψ′=−π.The information of material properties is hence crucial to precisely model the diffraction.Figure6 indicates the properties of different materials and diffraction loss occuring due to different material constitutes.Figure 6
Permittivity of different materials.


## 5. Simulations with the Dominant 3D Ray Tracing

In mmWaves (high frequencies), the concept of ray optics is considered. Maxwell equations are solved asymptotically. The wave length of the electromagnetic wave plays a key role in obtaining attractive and accurate results. Greater the size of the wavelength, the more accurate the results from an RT stimulation [47, 48]. Reliant on the electrogeometrical appearances available in digital maps, a ray undergoes diffuse scattering, diffraction, penetration, reflection, or attenuation. The penetration of rays joints upon accurate geometric and materialistic characteristics.The simulation setup is shown in Table2. We have considered a three-floored building. The path loss model we used for simulations is Close in. Two mmWave frequencies (28 GHz and 60 GHz are discussed for the complex layout of LoS and NLoS. The length and width of the wall are 2.8 m and 0.1 m, respectively. The rest of the parameters of the Base station and User terminal are mentioned in Table 2.Table 2
Simulation setup.
ParameterDescriptionUnit valueNumber of floors3Cable losses (dBm)3Ray tracing methodClose-inPropagation modelFull 3DCoupling losses (dB)70Operating frequencymmWave28 and 60 GHzLayoutComplexLoS/NLoSFadingModelRayleighCell structureHex (grid)1Building’s wallLength (m)2.8Width (m)0.1Base stationTransmitting power (dBm)21.0Height (m)25.1PatternDipoleBandwidth (GHz)0.1ObstacleEnabledPolarizationLatitudeUser terminalReceiving power loss (dBm)2Longitude (m)2.7PatternOmniBandwidth (GHz)0.1ObstacleEnabledPolarizationLongitude/latitudeRT tool complications increase with the order of interaction mechanism. Nevertheless, with high order interaction, the expansions in relation to prediction precision are frequently negligible but even so acquire major computations overhead [49].


### 5.1. Simulations for Outdoor

The simulations performed in this campaign are based on the intelligent 3D ray tracer built-in MATLAB. This tool is different from other 3D RT tools as it is capable of performing full 3D ray tracing in terms of path loss and received power. Other ray-tracing tools can find many paths, but the mentioned tool is used to find the dominant paths. The 3D map of the concerned scenario is shown in Figure7.Figure 7
Coverage map. (a) At 28 GHz; (b) at 60 GHz.
(a)(b)In this section, received signal strength (RSS) is the main parameter in designing the simulator. The antenna designed for outdoor simulations is an omni-directional circular dipole antenna with a transmitting frequency of 28 GHz and 60 GHz.Figure8(a) shows the current distribution of the antenna. The current at the center (circular) is greater than that at the bottom and top of the antenna. This is because of the feed which is at the center of the antenna. Figure 8(b) shows the 3D radiation pattern. The maximum radiation is 1.71 dBi and minimum is 13.2 dBi (Algorithm 1).Figure 8
Antenna characteristics. (a) Current distribution; (b) antenna radiation pattern.
(a)(b)Algorithm 1: Outdoor ray-tracing algorithm pseudocode.
(1)
//defining 5 dominant rays(2)
forrayout  = 1: 5 do(3)
//defining horizontal angles(4)
forhori = −180: 180°do(5)
//defining vertical angles(6)
forvert = −90: 90°do(7)
//developing rays and increment(8)
rayouti  = 1(9)
Develop-ray =i+1(10)
hori==>verti(11)
//finding intersection points(12)
whilerayout=intersectdo(13)
forj = 1: 2 do(14)
//finding diffracted rays(15)
ifdifrout=1then(16)
raydfr=raydfr+1(17)
else(18)
end(19)
//finding refracted rays(20)
rays=rayrefr(21)
rayrefr=rayrefr+1(22)
end(23)
end(24)
end(25)
//applying the proposed model(26)
PLCIddB=FSPLf,d0+10n.logd/d0+XσSFCI(27)
end(28)
end(29)
endThe height of the receiver (user with mobile phone) is 1.6 m. The user is standing still on the location mentioned in Table2. Figure 7 indicates the RSS in dBm. Figure 7(a) shows RSS for 28 GHz. It is evident that the fig that the received power at Rx is about −50 dBm. Figure 7(b) shows RSS for 28 GHz. It is evident from the figure that the received power at Rx is about −40 dBm. The comparison of Figures 7(a) and 7(b) reveal that the RSS level has a mean difference of around 8 dBm–10 dBm between 28 GHz and 60 GHz. This is due to the fact that the huge gap between mmWave frequencies does not affect much power of the signal in small cell environments. On the other hand, this is the sign of low penetration, low signal diffraction, and very high free-space losses.


### 5.2. Simulations for Indoor

The indoor floor map of the simulation environment is shown in Figure9. There are three transmitters in the facility. To understand the complex scenario for ray tracing, we choose the nearby transmitter, (in the corridor) (i.e., Tx2). Rx is in the office. Figure 10 illustrates the typical classroom where measurements were performed, and simulations were carried out. It consists of plywood, concrete tiles, plastic, brick work, plaster, and metal. Figure 6 shows the path loss of different material obstacles in the path of rays against a range of frequencies. It is evident that the loss due to bricks is constant throughout the range of mmWave frequencies (Algorithm 2).Figure 9
Floor plan for indoor simulations [5].Figure 10
Typical classroom under consideration.Algorithm 2: Indoor ray-tracing algorithm pseudocode.
(1)  //defining 5 dominant rays(2)forrayin  = 1:5 do(3)  //defining horizontal angles(4)forhori = −180: 180°do(5)    //defining vertical angles(6)forvert = −90: 90°do(7)      //developing rays and increment(8)rayouti  = 1(9)      Develop-ray =i+1(10)hori==>verti(11)      //finding intersection points(12)whilerayin=intersectdo(13)forj = 1: 2 do(14)         //finding diffracted rays(15)ifdifrin=1then(16)raydfr=raydfr+1(17)else(18)end(19)          //finding refracted rays(20)rays=rayrefr(21)rayrefr=rayrefr+1(21)end(22)end(23)end(24)      //applying proposed model(25)PLCIddB=FSPLf,d0+10n.logd/d0+XσSFCI(26)end(27)end(28)endFigures11(a) and Figure 11(b) show the results of indoor simulations at 28 GHz and 60 GHz, respectively. Five dominant rays are considered here to decrease computational time and make the algorithm less complex. In Figure 11(a), the color of two LoS rays is dark blue showing that the path loss is near to 80 dB. The other rays colored red and yellow are indicating path loss of 90 and 95 + respectively. This is due to the NLoS, reflection and diffraction of metal and brick walls. More detailed analyses of the rays and pattern of the path loss are explained in Table 3.Figure 11
Indoor intelligent ray tracing. (a) At 28 GHz; (b) at 60 GHz.
(a)(b)Table 3
Rays attributes for indoor ray tracing at 28 GHz.
Ray number12345Frequency (GHz)28Coordinate systemCartesianTransmitter location[−144.414; 37.593; 79.0609]Receiver location[−94.898; 16.208; 0.763]Propagation pathLoSLoSNLoSNLoSNLoSReflection location[10; 10; 0][−117.91; −125.3; 37.161][−145.41, −110.15; 37.17, 22.54; 77.54, 23.94][−128.74, −104.99; −127.15, 122.38; 54.27, 16.73][144.41, 150.21; −125.31, −122.04; 37.16, 36.32]Propagation delay (μ s)0.31711.060.2061.762.0835Propagation distance (m)9.531.89.652.8662.46Angle of departure[−23.35; −55.43][−80.76; −14.24][−157.45; −54.53][−84.56; −8.51][−29.42; −7.20]Angle of arrival[156.64; 55.43][−99.238; 14.244][157.45; 54.53][95.43; 8.51][−29.42; 7.20]Number of reflections01222Path loss (dB)80.9591.4481.0595.8597.31Phase shift (°)0.01050.10735.4902.02794.348In Figure11(b), the color of two LoS rays is light blue showing that path loss is near to 90 dB. The other rays colored green and yellow indicate the path loss of 95 and 100 + , respectively. This is due to NLoS, reflection, and diffraction of metal and brick walls. More detailed analyses of the rays and pattern of the path loss are explained in Table 4. The difference between the path loss due to the two different transmitting frequencies is promising in a way that increasing the frequency in indoor environment results in rising the path loss by 5 dB for every 10 GHz. This is also clear from CI model calculations.Table 4
Rays attributes for indoor ray tracing at 60 GHz.
Ray number12345Frequency (GHz)60Coordinate systemCartesianTransmitter location(−144.414; 37.593; 79.060 9)Receiver location(−94.898; 16.208; 0.763)Propagation pathLoSLoSNLoSNLoSNLoSReflection location(10; 10; 0)(−117.91;−125.3;37.161)(−145.41, −110.15; 37.17, 22.54; 77.54, 23.94)(−128.74, −104.99; −127.15, 122.38; 54.27, 16.73)(144.41, 150.21; −125.31, −122.04; 37.16, 36.32)Propagation delay (μ s)0.31711.060.2061.762.0835Propagation distance (m)9.531.89.652.8662.46Angle of departure(−23.35; −55.43)(−80.76; −14.24)(−157.45; −54.53)(−84.56; −8.51)(−29.42; −7.20)Angle of arrival(156.64; 55.43)(−99.238; 14.244)(157.45; 54.53)(95.43; 8.51)(−29.42; 7.20)Number of reflections01222Path loss (dB)87.5798.06787.67102.48103.93Phase shift (°)5.4013.820.096 36.144.83


## 5.1. Simulations for Outdoor

The simulations performed in this campaign are based on the intelligent 3D ray tracer built-in MATLAB. This tool is different from other 3D RT tools as it is capable of performing full 3D ray tracing in terms of path loss and received power. Other ray-tracing tools can find many paths, but the mentioned tool is used to find the dominant paths. The 3D map of the concerned scenario is shown in Figure7.Figure 7
Coverage map. (a) At 28 GHz; (b) at 60 GHz.
(a)(b)In this section, received signal strength (RSS) is the main parameter in designing the simulator. The antenna designed for outdoor simulations is an omni-directional circular dipole antenna with a transmitting frequency of 28 GHz and 60 GHz.Figure8(a) shows the current distribution of the antenna. The current at the center (circular) is greater than that at the bottom and top of the antenna. This is because of the feed which is at the center of the antenna. Figure 8(b) shows the 3D radiation pattern. The maximum radiation is 1.71 dBi and minimum is 13.2 dBi (Algorithm 1).Figure 8
Antenna characteristics. (a) Current distribution; (b) antenna radiation pattern.
(a)(b)Algorithm 1: Outdoor ray-tracing algorithm pseudocode.
(1)
//defining 5 dominant rays(2)
forrayout  = 1: 5 do(3)
//defining horizontal angles(4)
forhori = −180: 180°do(5)
//defining vertical angles(6)
forvert = −90: 90°do(7)
//developing rays and increment(8)
rayouti  = 1(9)
Develop-ray =i+1(10)
hori==>verti(11)
//finding intersection points(12)
whilerayout=intersectdo(13)
forj = 1: 2 do(14)
//finding diffracted rays(15)
ifdifrout=1then(16)
raydfr=raydfr+1(17)
else(18)
end(19)
//finding refracted rays(20)
rays=rayrefr(21)
rayrefr=rayrefr+1(22)
end(23)
end(24)
end(25)
//applying the proposed model(26)
PLCIddB=FSPLf,d0+10n.logd/d0+XσSFCI(27)
end(28)
end(29)
endThe height of the receiver (user with mobile phone) is 1.6 m. The user is standing still on the location mentioned in Table2. Figure 7 indicates the RSS in dBm. Figure 7(a) shows RSS for 28 GHz. It is evident that the fig that the received power at Rx is about −50 dBm. Figure 7(b) shows RSS for 28 GHz. It is evident from the figure that the received power at Rx is about −40 dBm. The comparison of Figures 7(a) and 7(b) reveal that the RSS level has a mean difference of around 8 dBm–10 dBm between 28 GHz and 60 GHz. This is due to the fact that the huge gap between mmWave frequencies does not affect much power of the signal in small cell environments. On the other hand, this is the sign of low penetration, low signal diffraction, and very high free-space losses.


## 5.2. Simulations for Indoor

The indoor floor map of the simulation environment is shown in Figure9. There are three transmitters in the facility. To understand the complex scenario for ray tracing, we choose the nearby transmitter, (in the corridor) (i.e., Tx2). Rx is in the office. Figure 10 illustrates the typical classroom where measurements were performed, and simulations were carried out. It consists of plywood, concrete tiles, plastic, brick work, plaster, and metal. Figure 6 shows the path loss of different material obstacles in the path of rays against a range of frequencies. It is evident that the loss due to bricks is constant throughout the range of mmWave frequencies (Algorithm 2).Figure 9
Floor plan for indoor simulations [5].Figure 10
Typical classroom under consideration.Algorithm 2: Indoor ray-tracing algorithm pseudocode.
(1)  //defining 5 dominant rays(2)forrayin  = 1:5 do(3)  //defining horizontal angles(4)forhori = −180: 180°do(5)    //defining vertical angles(6)forvert = −90: 90°do(7)      //developing rays and increment(8)rayouti  = 1(9)      Develop-ray =i+1(10)hori==>verti(11)      //finding intersection points(12)whilerayin=intersectdo(13)forj = 1: 2 do(14)         //finding diffracted rays(15)ifdifrin=1then(16)raydfr=raydfr+1(17)else(18)end(19)          //finding refracted rays(20)rays=rayrefr(21)rayrefr=rayrefr+1(21)end(22)end(23)end(24)      //applying proposed model(25)PLCIddB=FSPLf,d0+10n.logd/d0+XσSFCI(26)end(27)end(28)endFigures11(a) and Figure 11(b) show the results of indoor simulations at 28 GHz and 60 GHz, respectively. Five dominant rays are considered here to decrease computational time and make the algorithm less complex. In Figure 11(a), the color of two LoS rays is dark blue showing that the path loss is near to 80 dB. The other rays colored red and yellow are indicating path loss of 90 and 95 + respectively. This is due to the NLoS, reflection and diffraction of metal and brick walls. More detailed analyses of the rays and pattern of the path loss are explained in Table 3.Figure 11
Indoor intelligent ray tracing. (a) At 28 GHz; (b) at 60 GHz.
(a)(b)Table 3
Rays attributes for indoor ray tracing at 28 GHz.
Ray number12345Frequency (GHz)28Coordinate systemCartesianTransmitter location[−144.414; 37.593; 79.0609]Receiver location[−94.898; 16.208; 0.763]Propagation pathLoSLoSNLoSNLoSNLoSReflection location[10; 10; 0][−117.91; −125.3; 37.161][−145.41, −110.15; 37.17, 22.54; 77.54, 23.94][−128.74, −104.99; −127.15, 122.38; 54.27, 16.73][144.41, 150.21; −125.31, −122.04; 37.16, 36.32]Propagation delay (μ s)0.31711.060.2061.762.0835Propagation distance (m)9.531.89.652.8662.46Angle of departure[−23.35; −55.43][−80.76; −14.24][−157.45; −54.53][−84.56; −8.51][−29.42; −7.20]Angle of arrival[156.64; 55.43][−99.238; 14.244][157.45; 54.53][95.43; 8.51][−29.42; 7.20]Number of reflections01222Path loss (dB)80.9591.4481.0595.8597.31Phase shift (°)0.01050.10735.4902.02794.348In Figure11(b), the color of two LoS rays is light blue showing that path loss is near to 90 dB. The other rays colored green and yellow indicate the path loss of 95 and 100 + , respectively. This is due to NLoS, reflection, and diffraction of metal and brick walls. More detailed analyses of the rays and pattern of the path loss are explained in Table 4. The difference between the path loss due to the two different transmitting frequencies is promising in a way that increasing the frequency in indoor environment results in rising the path loss by 5 dB for every 10 GHz. This is also clear from CI model calculations.Table 4
Rays attributes for indoor ray tracing at 60 GHz.
Ray number12345Frequency (GHz)60Coordinate systemCartesianTransmitter location(−144.414; 37.593; 79.060 9)Receiver location(−94.898; 16.208; 0.763)Propagation pathLoSLoSNLoSNLoSNLoSReflection location(10; 10; 0)(−117.91;−125.3;37.161)(−145.41, −110.15; 37.17, 22.54; 77.54, 23.94)(−128.74, −104.99; −127.15, 122.38; 54.27, 16.73)(144.41, 150.21; −125.31, −122.04; 37.16, 36.32)Propagation delay (μ s)0.31711.060.2061.762.0835Propagation distance (m)9.531.89.652.8662.46Angle of departure(−23.35; −55.43)(−80.76; −14.24)(−157.45; −54.53)(−84.56; −8.51)(−29.42; −7.20)Angle of arrival(156.64; 55.43)(−99.238; 14.244)(157.45; 54.53)(95.43; 8.51)(−29.42; 7.20)Number of reflections01222Path loss (dB)87.5798.06787.67102.48103.93Phase shift (°)5.4013.820.096 36.144.83


## 6. Conclusion

In this paper, the outdoor to outdoor and indoor to indoor characteristics of the path loss with increasing the mmWave frequencies considering the network forensic with the help of the dominant path algorithm are studied. In the first approach, a conventional approach of the empirical and statistical analysis of path loss is adopted. Three different models including ABG, CI, and FI are discussed. The conclusion of the models is done that close in is better for indoor as well as outdoor scenarios. In the second approach, a software-based method is applied. Ray-tracing simulations indicate that the outdoor RSS level has a mean difference of around 8 dBm–10 dBm between 28 GHz and 60 GHz. This is due to the fact that, on the one hand, the huge gap between mmWave frequencies does not affect the power of the signal in small cell environments. On the other hand, this is the sign of low penetration, low signal diffraction, and very high free-space losses. Similarly, in indoor environment, the difference between the path loss is due to the two different transmitting frequencies which is promising in a way that increasing the frequency in indoor environment results in an increase in the path loss by 5 dB for every 10 GHz. In the future, we would like to investigate radio network forensic for artificial intelligence-aided wireless systems.



---

*Source: 9692892-2022-01-12.xml*