building wireless and public safety solid imperative › wp-content › uploads › solid... · the...

THE DEFINITIVE GUIDE FOR PRIVATE AND PUBLIC BUILDING OWNERS AND PROPERTY MANAGERS

IMPERATIVEIn-Building Wireless and Public-Safety

EVOLVING PUBLIC-SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS NEEDS

IN-BUILDING PUBLIC- SAFETY SYSTEMS: PAST, PRESENT & FUTURE

UNDERSTANDING PUBLIC-SAFETY CODES

PUBLIC-SAFETY ANDPUBLIC CELLULAR IN-BUILDING WIRELESS SYSTEMS

AND MORE....

PRESENTED BY:Q4 2016

™

solid.com

KEEPINGPEOPLECONNECTEDAND SAFE

SOLiD EXPRESS™ Public Safety DASwww.solid.com/das-solutions/express-public-safety-das.html

SOLiD Public-Safety DAS (Distributed Antenna System) solutions complywith today’s fire codes requiring separate in-building network infrastructure.

SOLiD supports first responder and essential two-way radio frequencies while meeting rigorous survivability standardsand working in interference-free harmony with commercial cellular networks.

KEEPING

KEEPING

KEEPING

CONNECTEDPEOPLEKEEPING



CONNECTED

AND SAFESOLiD Public-Safety DAS (Distributed Antenna System) solutions comply

CONNECTED


CONNECTED


CONNECTED


CONNECTED

SOLiD Public-Safety DAS (Distributed Antenna System) solutions comply

commercial cellular networks. and working in interference-free harmony with frequencies while meeting rigorous survivability standardsSOLiD supports first responder and essential two-way radio

with today’s fire codes requiring separate in-building network infrastructure. SOLiD Public-Safety DAS (Distributed Antenna System) solutions comply

ial c ing i

es w ppo t fi t d


d ti l t


di



colid.s

omc

www.solid.com/das-solutions/express-public-safety-das.htmlSOLiD www.solid.com/das-solutions/express-public-safety-das.html

™ EXPRESSD www.solid.com/das-solutions/express-public-safety-das.html

Public Safe ™ www.solid.com/das-solutions/express-public-safety-das.html

ety DAS

ACkNOWlEDGEmENTS

SOLiD thanks and acknowledges the following subject matter expertswho enthusiastically contributed to this publication:

Jonathan AdelsteinPresident and CEO of PCIA - The Wireless Infrastructure Association

mike BrownsonVice President, DAS Technical Solutions, Hutton Communications

Chief Charles ‘Chuck’ DowdAssistant Chief-911 Communications, New York Police Department(ret) and former FirstNet board member

John Facella, P.E., C.Eng.Principal at Panther Pines Consulting

Greg GlennSr. Director, RF Engineering, SOLiD

Donny JacksonEditor, Urgent Communications

Clark lazareNational Information Systems, AT&T Government Solutions

Robert leGrande IIPrincipal, The Digital Decision; former Chief Technology Officer, Government of the District of Columbia

Claudio lucente Independent Consultant at Fiorel (Canada)

manuel OjedaPresident, Morcom International

Chief Alan PerdueFire Chief, Greensboro, North Carolina (ret) and Executive Director, Safer Buildings Coalition

Rusty Stone, RCDDTelecommunications/Tech Project Manager at Camden Property Trust

©2016 SOLiD. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction, distribution, publication or electronic transmission of any content herein is not allowed without the express written permission of SOLiD.

For reproduction requests contact [email protected]

CONTENTS

Foreward ........................... Page 2

Introduction to the .............. Page 4 Public-Safety Imperative

Evolution of the .................. Page 6 Public-Safety Imperative

The Role of Public Safety ....... Page 10and Public Cellular

Understanding Fire .............. Page 14 and Building Codes

Funding and Ownership ........ Page 18

Case Study: DC Water ............ Page 21

Glossary of Terms ................ Page 23

1

2

ThE IN-BUIlDING WIRElESS PUBlIC-SAFETy ImPERATIvE

To a large extent, most people— and enterprises — organizetheir plans into three main areas:(1) things they must do; (2) thingsthey ought to do; and (3) thingsthey would like to do or would benice to have, but are not necessitiesand arguably are luxuries.As an example, consider the

notion of a parent planning achild’s education. It is generallyaccepted that parents “must” takesteps to have their children edu-cated at least through the highschool level — to a large extent, itis the law. Most agree that they“ought” to have their kids attend aschool that helps ensure students’safety and provides an environ-ment that prepares students tocontinue their education at a college or university, if they want.It would be “nice” if the school(s)provides strong programs in areasof special interest to the student —be it arts, athletics, student politics,etc. — and happens to be anearby public school, as opposedto a private school that requires alengthy daily commute.During the past three decades,

communications have undergonea rapid transformation that hasseen wireless communicationsevolve from a luxury to a necessityfor most in society.As a young reporter for a news-

paper in a Dallas suburb, I remem-ber a city council member in thelate 1980s and early 1990s arguethat students should be prohibitedfrom carrying cellular phones onpublic-school campuses. His rea-soning was that cellular phoneservice was so expensive that theonly students with both the needto have a mobile phone and the

money to pay for one were kidsworking for drug dealers. In addi-tion, students that really needed tomake a call could always find alandline phone in the school officeor a nearby pay phone.This position may sound crazy,

but it was not simply dismissed atthe time. When the council mem-ber first announced his position,mobile phone use was limitedlargely to the wealthy few whocould afford a service that offeredspotty coverage at best. However,as prices dropped and coverageimproved, cellular phones becamemore mainstream, and parentswanted their kids to have them, sothey could communicate thingslike dinner plans and when theyneeded to be picked up fromafter-school activities.Today, the wireless evolution/

revolution has had a massive im-pact on the way we communicate.There are more wireless devices in the market than people on theplanet, with many users havingmore than one device. In short, wireless technology —

be it Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, cellular orland mobile radio (LMR), which isused by public safety and manyother enterprises — is the methodthat is used most for both voiceand data communications. In agrowing number of circumstances,wireless is the only option, becausewireline service is no longer ubiq-uitous indoors. About 40% of U.S.households do not have a wirelinephone, according to the FCC.Meanwhile, pay phones are aboutas rare as 8-track tapes and VCRs.As a result, wireless connectivity

indoors is no longer “nice” to haveor something that “ought” to be

done; today, it is a “must,” if onlyto ensure that people can call forhelp in case of an emergency — anotion that the FCC recognizedwhen it adopted new 911 rulesdesigned to bolster indoor locationaccuracy information from wirelessdevices. It is — as the title of thiseBook suggests — an “imperative.”But wireless indoor coverage always has been a challenge.Radio signals lose strength as theyencounter physical obstacles,whether it is in the form of amountain, a dense forest or a man-made structure, like a high-rise office building or an apartmentcomplex.Making the challenge more

difficult are advances in the energy efficiency of buildings. The designs and materials used tokeep buildings warm in the winterand cool in the summer whileusing less power also are signifi-cantly more resistant to radio signals. In these energy-efficientbuildings, the idea that radio signals from an outdoor towerconsistently will be able to penetrate inside a building to provide indoor coverage — particularly coverage that does notdrain battery life from a device —no longer is realistic.Instead, a more reliable approach

is to design coverage inside astructure. When designed effectively,an in-building coverage solutionwill deliver a better radio signal toa wireless device, which typicallyresults in better audio quality forvoice applications, better through-put speeds for data applicationsand longer battery life for theuser’s device. It also has potentialto deliver much better location

FOREWARDBy DOnny JAckSOn

3


data from the device, includingmuch-anticipated vertical — or “Zaxis” — information.From a public-safety perspective,

good indoor coverage for customersand first responders provides multiple benefits during an emer-gency response. Initially, strong commercial

indoor coverage lets consumerswho are indoors dial 911 to reportan emergency via their cellularphone — the device they are mostcomfortable using, and it shouldprovide better location informationin the near future. This can savevaluable time in circumstanceswhen seconds can mean the difference between life and death.Once first responders are on the

scene, a good indoor public-safetysystem allows firefighters, law enforcement and EMS to commu-nicate better and more efficientlyusing LMR voice today, with thepotential to leverage Band 14 LTEand transmit sensor data via myr-iad technologies in the near future.This data capability includes theability to track the location of firstresponders, as well as monitor theirhealth via biometric technology. When first-response efforts

have gone awry, communicationsdifficulties almost always are citedas a key contributing factor. This is understandable, because any organizing an endeavor – from theconstruction of a sports arena toplanning a family reunion – tendsto happen more smoothly whenstrong lines of communications are open.In short, a facility with good

indoor wireless-communicationscoverage for consumers and pub-lic safety is inherently safer thanthose that lack this functionality.Without good indoor coverage,there likely will be a delay in reporting an emergency situationand the response effort often isdelayed, which can lead to

increased property loss, injuriesand fatalities.This straightforward reality

should be reflected in the lawsand financial issues associated withbuildings and other structures.Laws and insurance discountshave long been in place to requireor encourage the installation of firesprinklers — with good reason,because such systems can reduceproperty loss and save lives.Given that indoor wireless

coverage achieves similar goals inbroader range of use cases — firesprinklers will not help a victim ofa heart attack or domestic violence— we should have similar require-ments and incentives in place forin-building wireless systems forboth consumers and public safety.Building owners who make the

commitment to provide this capa-bility should be rewarded legallyand financially for making their facilities safer. Those who do notprovide in-building wireless cover-age in their facilities should payhigher insurance rates and othercosts, because their structures simply are not as safe as thosewith in-building coverage.Not only are policies associated

with in-building coverage importantfrom a safety perspective, theyhave other implications, as well.With reliable indoor coverage andlocation capabilities, applicationsand businesses can be establishedthat leverage this information. In addition, good in-building coverage helps keep customershappy, which is always good forbusiness.Meanwhile, if a network

provider knows that in-buildingcoverage is available in all facilities,they do not have to spend asmuch on outdoor macro towers,in hopes of having the radio signals from the towers penetratethe buildings to provide indoorcoverage. In 2014, officials for

Public Safety Communications Research (PSCR) stated that First-Net could reduce the number ofoutdoor sites needed for its much-anticipated public-safety broad-band network by 14%, if it knewthat indoor coverage was availablein all buildings.Exactly how this should be

implemented is a matter thatshould be a topic of healthy debate that should be part of aconversation that needs to happensooner, rather than later. Invest-ments in wireless technologiescontinue to accelerate, and theycan be done much more efficientlyif everyone understands the big-picture goals as soon as possible.For instance, given the 911,

lifeline and public-safety implica-tions of in-building systems in theforeseeable future, my belief isthat the core in-building wirelesscapability should be hardenedfrom a power and physical stand-point for both consumers andpublic safety. However, variousscenarios and costs factors need tobe assessed before policies are set— different types of buildings mayjustify different approaches.This is just one example of the

nuanced technical and policy discussions that should occur inthe coming months and years. But the important thing is thatthese conversations take place, so appropriate policies can be established that enable efficientdeployment of technologies thatwill make both consumers andfirst responders safer in the future.Addressing this in-building wire-

less issue is the right thing to do,and the timing is ideal. It shouldbe considered an imperative.

Donny Jackson, Editor, Urgent Communications

INTRODUCTION:ThE PUBlIC-SAFETyCOmmUNICATIONS

ImPERATIvEJOhn cELEnTAnO, EDiTOR

“If you can’t call us, we can’t help you.”chief Alan Perdue, Fire chief, Greensboro, north carolina (ret)

and Executive Director, Safer Buildings coalition

5


Public-safety communications isat an important juncture.Every day, seemingly, news

headlines are filled with reports ofincidents in which communicationsplays a pivotal role in the outcome.At the height of any emergency,

it is paramount that first responderscan communicate with one another“Do they hear me? Can I hearthem?” Yet as clear as this impera-tive is, the stark reality is that public-safety communicationsfaces challenges, particularly insidebuildings having certain character-istics. But public-safety communica-

tions is not relegated to police, fire and emergency medical services (EMS). It’s about the gen-eral public, too. After all, if you orI can’t be notified about an incidentor call for help, first responderswon’t know to help us.It is imperative that every stake-

holder in the public safety milieuassess and address the issues thatimpact their contribution to public-safety communications:• First responders must find com-mon ground on communicationssystems, and in each jurisdiction,determine how police, fire andEMS should interoperate.• Communications equipmentvendors must deliver products and services that provide robustin-building wireless solutions,while serving wireless digitalhandheld devices and cellularsmartphones that are changingboth verbal and non-verbal communications in public-safetyand public cellular networks alike.• Municipalities and local jurisdic-tions must stipulate the buildingand fire codes that make buildingssafer within their jurisdictions,while staying current with contin-ual national and international code revisions.

• Commercial building ownersand property managers mustadopt and implement prevailinglocal building and fire codes, andfind workable business models tofund in-building wireless systemsthat enhance public safety insidetheir buildings.To be sure, it is vital that both

public safety and commercial cellular to work together to solvefor public safety communications.This outcome is the vision of First-Net, the ambitious and once-in-a-generation initiative to create anew public-safety broadband network (PSBN). However, First-Net was intended to fund andachieve outdoor communications,not indoor. With an estimated 80 percent of all wireless callsoriginating or terminating insidebuildings, it is vital that indoorsdoes not get left behind.It is with these issues in mind

that The Imperative has been created.This eBook is intended as a

reference document for the manyconstituents who face the chal-lenges of improving in-buildingwireless service that supports public-safety communications.In preparing this document, we

consulted many of the industry’sleading experts and proponentsin public-safety communications,tapping their deep knowledge andexperience in public-safety codes,first responder operations, wirelesstechnology, and telecommunica-tions networks.

The outcome is a series of discussions on the most pertinenttopics:

PUBlIC-SAFETy COmmUNICATIONS EvOlUTIONA look at how public-safety com-munications got started and whereit’s headed.

UNDERSTANDING CODE FOR PUBlIC-SAFETy COmmUNICATIONSAn overview and demystifying ofrelevant and evolving buildingand fire codes related to public-safety communications.

ThE ROlE OF PUBlIC SAFETy AND PUBlICCEllUlAR IN-BUIlDING WIRElESS SySTEmSA hotly-debated topic in which weweigh the pros and cons of eachnetwork architecture approach.

PAyING FOR IN-BUIlDING WIRElESS SySTEmS: FUNDING AND OWNERShIPA discussion of strategies for overcoming the challenge of anunfunded mandate for indoorpublic-safety communications.

CASE STUDy: DC WATERA profile of a unique public-safetycommunications deployment inthe nation’s capital wastewatertreatment plant.

We believe that fostering discus-sion and debate will only help toget the key issues on the table.Such discussion can lead to a con-sensus and progress on how pub-lic safety communications issuesare addressed and solved.To that end, we welcome yourcomments and feedback.

“At the end of the day, a cop or firefighterneeds to be able to key up: I need help!”

chief charles “chuck” Dowd, Assistant chief-911communications, new york Police Department (ret)

and former Firstnet board member

6


WORD OF mOUThThroughout history, the shrill

cry of “FIRE! FIRE!” was the call toaction that summoned first respon-ders to the scene of an emergency.Simple, and it worked. That isuntil towns turned into cities andnew technology presented a viableand more efficient alternative.From a simple “FIRE!” to E-911,scalability and enhanced voicetechnology are the key drivers andare relevant even today.

FIRE CAll BOxESBy the 1830’s technology was at

the ready, and like most high-techadvancements, you have solutionslooking for problems to solve.Even by today’s standards, thetelegraph found its way into publicsafety very quickly and rapidly ad-vanced the ability to communicatewith the fire department. Using te-legraphy, the first fire call box wasinstalled in Boston in 1852. Callboxes were simple machines thatgenerated a telegraph signal thatwas decoded at a central location.The idea of using some sort of sig-

naling to notify the fire departmentof an emergency situation vastlyimproved response times. Call boxdesigns improved and the brightred metal boxes sprouted up oncorners throughout major citiesacross the country. More important,each call box was numbered andwas connected to a central dispatchstation that received an alarmwhen the call box was activated or“pulled” by a citizen or police. Nowfire departments could receive immediate notification of a fire,determine the approximate locationof the fire from the call box num-ber, and dispatch fire crews to thescene within minutes. Adding atelephone to a call box further ad-vanced the speed, efficiency andaccuracy of notifying the fire department because the callerconnected directly with a dis-patcher at the central station andcould provide more detail on theexact location of the fire or incident.Call boxes with telephone jackswere installed in buildings to servethe same purpose as outdoor callboxes. As technology advanced,

so did the efficiency of publicsafety communications and a shiftin stakeholder’s responsibility. Up to this point, municipalities primarily funded, installed andmaintained the call box networks.Even though curbside call boxes

are a thing of the past, buildingand fire codes still require manualpull stations in every commercialbuilding. Building owners becamestakeholders in public safety andwill continue to play a significantrole in the communication impera-tive. Buildings old and new nowhave code requirements for fireprevention, detection, alarms andcommunication systems. But what about communications

among the police, fire and EMS atthe scene of an emergency? Enterin more technology – the portableradio.

lAND mOBIlE RADIO (lmR)Handheld two-way technology

found its way home with thetroops returning from World WarII. Motorola engineers developedthe technology and supplied the

EvOlUTION OF ThEPUBlIC-SAFETy

COmmUNICATIONSImPERATIvE

Public-safety communications has evolved out of necessity and in line with technological advancements.Throughout this evolution, there have been many imperatives. Over time, it is through these imperatives

that we have advanced our communications and created safer environments to work, live and play. So with FirstNet on the horizon and wireless broadband technologies aligning with our current imperative,

how did we get to where we are today? how did technology play a role, and how did the stakeholders make it happen?

7


troops during the war. After thewar, the company looked for waysto commercialize its ‘walkie-talkie’designs. Motorola promoted itstwo-way mobile radio to policeand fire departments for public-safety uses. Now police officers andfirefighters could communicate witheach other with portable radios.These radios at first were analog

devices that operated over only afew channels so their functionalitywas limited and often the systembecame congested trying to handlean overload of calls, especially dur-ing an emergencyinside buildings.In response, the government and

the industry organization APCOestablished initiatives to developrequired capabilities and standardsbeginning with Project 16 whichwas later supplanted by Project 25(or P25) to improve public-safetycommunications for enhanced coordination, timely response, and efficient and effective use ofcommunications equipment. Operating at VHF/UHF and 800

MHz frequencies, P25 radios canbe used inside buildings becausethe low frequencies can penetratewalls. However, there are limita-tions: dense building materials,and high tech finishes, like highefficiency window coatings, canreduce or even block RF signals.Additionally the type of buildingwill also play a role in RF signalreception. In tall buildings, first re-sponders cannot communicatewith each other above 10 floors ifthey are operating in 1:1 simplexmode. Conventional- or trunked-mode that uses base stations andrepeaters can help communicationsinside buildings, but every buildingis different.“When you move into the ‘built

environment’ where we do ourwork, you never know whatyou’re going to get” says ChiefAlan Perdue, a retired Fire Chief ofGuilford County Emergency Services

“FIRE! FIRE!” From a simple “FIRE!” to E-911, scalability and enhanced voicetechnology are the key drivers and are relevant even today.

8


in Greensboro, North Carolina andcurrently the Executive Director of the Safer Building Coalition.Without an adequate in-buildingwireless facility, two-way radiosquickly can hit their limits. Recent events in our history

have made it painfully clear that itis better to communicate wirelessly,and this is where the imperativebecomes very clear. Every buildingor structure presents a uniquecommunication challenge and it’sthis challenge that begins to definethe Imperatives stakeholders andtheir roles to meeting the challenges.Once again technology will beleveraged to meet the challenge.

WIRElESS BROADBANDMost teenagers with smartphones

today possess wireless communica-tion abilities that are superior totoday’s first responders. Wirelessbroadband technology, like thetelegraph over a century ago, is set to advance public-safety com-munications and it promises to deliver big! FirstNet is a wirelessbroadband network based on 4G LTE technology operating in the 700 MHz band and is slated tosupport the next generation ofpublic-safety communicationsUsing nationwide 700 MHz

spectrum, FirstNet is designed tounify the decades-long disparatepublic-safety communications, andwill help keep communities andemergency responders safer with a robust ubiquitous network.FirstNet’s appeal is that it will

leverage commercial wireless technology that is complementaryto what the major cellular carriersare using.Designed with a redundant

highly-available, high-reliable architecture, FirstNet will supportmobile devices that operate in bothpublic-safety and cellular carrierfrequencies with the back-up thatfirst responders want according to

Robert LeGrande, a former CTO forthe District of Columbia and cur-rent CEO of the Digital Decision, a consultancy for communicationsinitiatives for Federal, State andLocal governments. This way, if thepublic-safety frequencies go downfor any reason, first responders can‘roam’ or transfer their calls ontothe public cellular network. LeGrande believes that FirstNet’s

capabilities for handling voice, dataand video communications over aunified network platform make itvery compelling for first respon-ders. This broadband link openspossibilities for streaming videofrom body cameras to access todata including photographs, build-ing drawings and maps not to mention true interoperability be-

tween first responders. With appropriate filtering, there

will be no interference with publiccellular 4G LTE 700 MHz frequen-cies, whether on the outdoor net-work or on an in-building DAS.Proper system design is the key,nonetheless. In addition to theFirstNet frequencies, a DAS cancarry P25 VHF/UHF and 800 MHzpublic safety frequencies which willremain operational for some time,thereby enhancing in-building coverage for two-way radios.Progress requires change and

LeGrande expects police and firedepartments will be slow to giveup the familiarity of their LMR radios in favor of a new multi-purpose handheld device on FirstNet. He believes, however,

CONGRESS CREATES FIRSTNETOn February 22, 2012, the U.S Congress enacted the Middle Class

Tax Relief and Job Recovery Act of 2012 (Spectrum Act) which:

• Formed the First Responder network Authority (Firstnet) as an independent authority within the U.S. Department of commerce.Firstnet is charged with responsibilities for deploying and operatingthe nationwide public safety broadband network.

• Gives Firstnet the mission to build, operate and maintain the firsthigh-speed, nationwide wireless broadband network dedicated topublic safety.

• Firstnet will provide a single interoperable platform for emergencyand daily public-safety communications. This broadband network willfulfill a fundamental need of the public safety community as well asthe last remaining recommendation of the 9/11 commission.

• Directed the commission to allocate the D-Block (758-763Mhz/788-793 Mhz) to public safety for use in a nationwide broadband network;

• Designated that Firstnet will hold the license for both the existingpublic safety broadband spectrum Band 14 (763-769 Mhz/793-799Mhz) and the reallocated D Block, and

• Allocated up to $7 billion dollars to Firstnet to construct this nationwide public-safety broadband network.

9


that once first responders becomecomfortable with wireless broad-band capabilities and with propertraining and testing, they graduallywill migrate from LMR radios.

ThE IN-BUIlDING WIRElESS ImPERATIvEWhat are building owners to

make of FirstNet? At this writing, building and

fire codes are being revised andupdated to include DAS technol-ogy as a viable extension of thepublic-safety communications network indoors. Today, there are

specific code and standards thataddress: coverage area, fire-ratedcable raceways and equipment enclosures, battery back-up andrequirements for redundancy, system monitoring and acceptablecommunication signal levels. For the majority of people, 80

percent of cellular traffic occurs indoors and, when most peopleare faced with an emergencytoday, they reach for their mobiledevice to call 911, not a landline.This in-building reality is the imperative that will further advance and drive code require-

ments, and appropriate solutionswill need to align to meet the requirements.Once established in the code,

architects and engineers, commer-cial developers and building owners can start to plan for in-building wireless as part of thefacility’s ecosystem. Still, to make itall work, Chief Perdue is emphaticthat public safety is an imperativeis shared by multiple stakeholders:“The industry - manufacturers, de-signers, installers, building ownersand public-safety organizations –they all have to be at the table.”

hISTORy lESSON: ThE FIRE mARkThese metal plaques marked with the emblem of the insurance company were affixed to the front of insured buildings as a guide to the insurance company's fire brigade. Subscribers paid fire fighting companies in advance for fire protection and in exchange would receive a fire mark to attach to their building. The payments for the fire marks supported the fire fighting companies. Folklore suggests that the volunteer fire company would not fight a fire unless there was a fire mark on the burning building.(Sources: Wikipedia and The Firemark circle of the Americas)

ThE ROlE OFPUBlIC-SAFETy ANDPUBlIC CEllUlAR

IN-BUIlDINGWIRElESS SySTEmS

Think about it: In an emergency, how do people call for help? These days, most people will dial 911 on their smartphone.

But what if they are inside a high-rise office building or other large venue and they do not have cellular coverage to call or send a text message? hundreds of lives could be at risk.

And if emergency first responders face the same indoor communication dilemma, then what?

DMS INTERNET CLOUD

BASESTATIONS

ROU

ROU

ROU

ROU

ROU

ROU

BIU

ODU

DAS(EACH FLOOR)

PS REPEATER

The cellular radio frequency (RF) signalsource is fed into a DAS head-end. The signal source may be: 1) a basetransceiver station (BTS) for cellular,public safety or both, that is co-locatedat the DAS head-end, or 2) a bi-direc-tional amplifier (BDA) co-located withthe head-end and is fed by a directionalantenna, called a donor antenna thatpicks up the outside signal from anearby macrocell site.

The DAS head-end converts the RF toan optical signal for transmission overfiber optic cable that connects to DASremote units.

The DAS remote unit then converts theoptical signal back to RF and connectsto one or more indoor antennas thatare strategically located or distributedthroughout the building.

hOW A DISTRIBUTEDANTENNA SySTEm(DAS) WORkS:

11


According to statistics fromAT&T, nearly 80 percent of allwireless calls originate or terminateinside buildings. In response, thewireless industry has developedsolutions to enable cellular servicefrom the outside, in. A proven approach is through the use ofDistributed Antenna Systems(DAS).By design, a DAS can support

frequency bands from multiplecellular providers. Similarly, a DASdesigned to enable public-safetycommunications can support themultiple frequency bands used bypublic safety such as VHF/UHFand 800 MHz. This raises an important question:

Should a single DAS support bothcellular and public-safety signals? At first blush, the advantages

appear to be attractive. However,there are myriad considerationsthat inform a definitive answer

may not be clear.“There is a big need for

in-building coverage for publicsafety” says Greg Glenn, Sr. Director, RF Engineering at SOLiD.“The problem is that there are notany best practices to deal withpublic-safety communications.Each city and county has theirown take [on in-building wireless],so it is hard for DAS installers toknow what to do in each case.”(For more information, please seeour chapter on “UnderstandingFire and Building Codes for Public-Safety Communications”)Glenn points out that the

frequency assignments for public-safety and cellular services havegotten closer so the potential forinterference has increased. This situation has arisen with 800 MHzre-banding for cellular that couldinterfere with 800 MHz Trunkedradio used by first responders.

A similar situation arises in 700MHz frequencies where adjoiningbands are assigned for carrier-based commercial cellular 4G LTEand FirstNet public-safety channels.“Outside, we’re good with

1,000-2,000 feet between base stations. Indoor application ismuch different than outdoor;we’re not so lucky,” says Glenn.Traditionally, most DAS equip-

ment manufacturers focus on developing solutions that are opti-mized for cellular applications.After all, nearly nine of every tendollars spent on in-building wire-less gear is for commercial cellular.DAS equipment that is designedoutside of the U.S. is often unableto handle both cellular and publicsafety in the same building. Support for both services must befiltered, but that adds complexityand cost to the systems.SOLiD’s Glenn describes three

approaches for enabling bothcommercial cellular and publicsafety indoors: 1) Separate or parallel DAS lay-

ers that have discrete infrastructure including cable feeds and anten-nas for cellular and public safety.2) “Hybrid” separated DAS lay-

ers that have separate cable infra-structure (i.e., public safety on onefiber from the head-end and cellular on another fiber) but thencombine both services on thesame antenna.3) Converged DAS where com-

mercial cellular and public-safetyfrequencies are combined on thesame DAS infrastructureThe latter remains controversial.

Technically, a converged platformis feasible but only with the addition of expensive RF filteringat the DAS remote to ensure thatthe respective services do not interfere with each other. In addition, specialized codes forpublic safety may not apply tocommercial cellular service. Andlastly, carriers or third party ownerneutral hosts may not pay for apublic-safety DAS. “There are pros and cons both

ways”, says Mike Brownson, Vice President DAS Technical Solutions at Hutton Communica-tions. “You have to let the applica-tion determine the way to go,taking into account the buildingsize and shape, and the materialsused. Then there are the buildingowner’s priorities, who is puttingthe system together, and politicsand technology, especially whenyou bring in public safety.”He adds that with cellular DAS

you pretty much need coverageeverywhere. “Public safety doesn’tnecessarily need full-building cov-erage but in large buildings youneed to cover stairwells and lowerlevels. If you design each one forwhat’s needed, you probably endup with a lot less equipment.”

The International Fire Code(IFC) stipulates 95% general build-ing coverage for public safety. Bycontrast, the National Fire Protec-tion Association (NFPA) stipulates90% general building coverage but99% coverage in critical areas suchas control rooms or pump rooms. “With Land Mobile Radio (LMR),

to move from 90% to 95% coverageis not trivial”, says John Facella,principal at Panther Pines Consult-ing. “It’s a non-linear relationship.It might mean adding 50% more[antenna] sites. I’m not sure if it’sworth it.”“DAS for public safety is still up

to in the air. It’s up to the industryto agree on what’s needed. In-building wireless buildouts areproblematic in general. Tier 1 iscovered by the carriers. Tier 2, themiddle tier, - who will pay for it,nobody knows. FirstNet won’t doit”, added Facella. “Implementation

of sprinklers, smoke detectors, firepull boxes took time. The middletier won’t be built out soon. It maytake a long time. Economics willdictate separate or a convergedsystem.”The real question is more oper-

ational, and the ability for variousfirst responder agencies to com-municate with each other outsideand inside buildings.Chief Charles ‘Chuck’ Dowd,

retired Assistant Chief for 911Communications for the New YorkPolice Department (NYPD) andformer FirstNet board member hasfirst-hand experience where inter-operability and less than optimalcoverage impacted the emergencycommunications. He was on-siteduring 9/11, Hurricane Sandy andthe Northeast Blackout. “These arehigh-volume, high-demand situa-tions where the police, fire andEMS need to talk to each other.” Dowd says that first responders

have difficulty communicating inside buildings because first responders use two-way radiosdifferently. “When fire crews aredispatched then get on-scene, theytend to go to 1:1 simplex operationwith their radios, there is no network-wide communications.”The problem is that point-to-

point communications, betweencommand on the ground and crews30 stories up, is limited in high-risebuilding as the building structureitself greatly limits the RF signal.In contrast, police use radios

that are almost all on network frequencies served by a networkof towers. They tend to work better in taller buildings becausethey receive signals from land-based towers or even better, from antennas installed at similarelevations on nearby buildings.Solutions to improve coverage

and interoperability for public-safety communications currentlyexist, and other initiatives are on

ThE IN-BUIlDING WIRElESS PUBlIC SAFETy ImPERATIvE

12

PS

CELL

PS

CELL

PSCELL

SEPARATE OR PARALLEL DAS

“HYBRID” SEPARATED DAS

CONVERGED DAS

Three approaches for enabling both commercial cellular and public-safetycoverage indoors.

13


the way. Today’s DAS networkscan support first responders viaLMR, VHF/UHF frequencies. Nowfast forward a few years and theFirstNet requirements are likely toprovide additional communica-tions capabilities to first respon-ders through broadband,LTE-based radios. Broadband capability will indeed open thedoor for public safety to take ad-vantage of technology that thegeneral public uses today. Livevideo from body cameras and GPSlocation based applications willleap communications to new levels.Dowd believes that it will take

time for public-safety agencies toadopt LTE handset technology and that there will be a period oftransition as the FirstNet vision becomes a reality. The benefits ofa public-safety broadband networkare significant but the costs to

migrate, and a huge embeddedbase of LMR VHF/UHF radiosmeans that the technology will bearound for some time. To thatend, in-building DAS solutions willneed to be engineered to supportboth LMR and LTE frequencies.Said Dowd, “At the end of the

day, a cop or firefighter needs tobe able to key-up, ‘I need help!’Will FirstNet mimic the reliabilityof LMR? It will happen eventually.”

ThE IN-BUIlDING WIRElESS ImPERATIvEWill it take another natural dis-

aster or other tragedy to achieve thevision shared by many includingChief Dowd as well as the SaferBuildings Coalition for makingbuildings safer by developing initiatives that lead to more build-ings being served with commercialand public-safety wireless commu-

nications coverage? Robert LeGrande, a former CTO

for the District of Columbia andcurrent CEO of the Digital Decision,a consultancy for communicationsinitiatives for Federal, State andLocal governments echoes theaforementioned views that solvingfor indoor public-safety communi-cations means thinking about tomorrow, today. “We’re not trying to solve a problem, we’retrying to create a comprehensiveand long term solution. We needto branch out and look at non-traditional thinking on both sides –commercial and public safety – to accomplish that.”Are building owners and equip-

ment suppliers up for the challenge?While technical issues are fairly

well understood at this juncture,the IFC and NFPA fire codes needto evolve. So building developersand DAS designers are reluctant tocommit unless the requirementsare clear.Local jurisdictions need to take

a stand on what standards andregulations should apply, but theytoo are being cautious, pendingnew code releases.Facella comments, “We’re hoping

IFC will take a similar stance asNFPA, hopefully with similar numbers. Today’s minimum standards have wide conflicts.”Lastly, there’s the challenge of

complying with an unfunded mandate. Is it solely up to thebuilding owner to fund a public-safety DAS in their building? Or isit a shared responsibility amongin-building stakeholders includingthe venue, wireless operators andmunicipality? What about tax in-centives or insurance discountsthat inspire to comply with what isrequiredAlthough there are more

questions than answers at thispoint, it is clear that it is vital notto leave buildings behind.

CAN yOU hEAR mE?Police and Fire personnel depend on code-compliant coverage on multiple frequency bands for two-way radio and emergencycommunication no matter where they are in your facility –through thick building walls and even underground.

14


CODES AND Why ARE ThEy ImPORTANT?Navigating myriad international,

national and local building and firecodes for public-safety communi-cations can be bewildering andconfusing to most property own-ers and building managers. Evenexperts in the field find it challeng-ing to stay current with the neces-sary changes.Public-safety codes establish the

guidelines for building and firesafety to protect occupants andfirst responders alike in the eventof a fire or other life safety emer-gency in both new and existingbuildings.Common terminology includes

‘codes’, ‘standards’ and ‘ordinances’.These terms are not the same eventhough they are often used inter-changeably. Yet they work togetherto accomplish the common goal of

reliable indoor communications.Basically, ‘codes’ are what you

have to do, ‘standards’ tell youhow to accomplish that, and ‘ordinances’ provide the legal pathfor getting those functions intoplace. (Figure 1)A key distinction in public safety

for stakeholders that hail from thecommercial wireless industry is the rigidity of code language: public-safety codes stipulate “shall”

UNDERSTANDINGFIRE & BUIlDING CODES

FOR PUBlIC-SAFETyCOmmUNICATIONS

15


requirements, not “should” guide-lines. Fire alarms and sprinkler systems

have been around since the mid tolate 1800s, and the codes for thosesystems were some of the first fireand building codes adopted in thiscountry. By comparison, modelcode language for in-buildingwireless public-safety communica-tions are relatively new, less than10 years.The International Code Council

(ICC) introduced in-building requirements for public-safetycommunications into the Interna-tional Fire Code (IFC) in 2009.And even then, it only showed upin the appendix, which meant itwas a recommendation availablefor adoption, not necessarily a re-quirement in the technical provi-sions of the code. Upon furthermodification, that language gotmoved to the technical provisionof chapter five of the IFC in 2012.National Fire Protection Associa-tion (NFPA) requirements also followed similar timelines.The intent of ICC’s IFC is “to

establish the minimum require-ments consistent with nationally-recognized good practice forproviding a reasonable level of lifesafety and property protectionfrom the hazards of fire, explosionor dangerous conditions in newand existing buildings, structuresand premises, and to providesafety to fire fighters and emergencyresponders during emergency operations.”The NFPA stipulates that a

‘code’ or ‘standard’ includes “awide variety of technical worksthat prescribe rules, guidelines,best practices, specifications, testmethods, design or installationprocedures and the like. The size,scope and subject matter of codesand standards varies widely, rang-ing from lengthy model buildingor electrical codes to narrowly

scoped test methods or productspecifications.”

CODE DEvElOPmENT PROCESSESIt is important as an industry to

identify what is really needed forin-building wireless public-safetycommunications and determinehow to get modifications and/oradditional requirements into themodel documents for jurisdictionsto adopt via state or local ordi-nance. This goal is to deliver moreconsistency for everyone involved. ICC and the NFPA publish

model codes and standards forpublic-safety in-building wirelesscommunications. Model codesbring all the issues together, butthere are differences betweenwhat is published by the ICC andthe NFPA. So it is important to beaware of what is adopted via ordinance in each respective jurisdiction. Public agencies maycombine requirements from these

codes and standards to create theirown code, so it is imperative thatstakeholders understand what isrequired in each jurisdiction.These model codes from the

ICC and NFPA are typically updated on a three-year cycle, andthe frequency of change for localcodes can vary depending on thepolitical climate of the community,although they rarely go longerthan six years before modificationsare adopted.Model code language is adopted

by the state or local jurisdictionsand municipalities through ordi-nances that then set the rules andregulations for public-safety in-building radio enhancement systems.

CODE ENFORCEmENTThe person or entity most oftenresponsible for enforcing thesecodes is referred to as the author-ity having jurisdiction (AHJ). Some

EXAMPLE CODE PROCESSChange Deadline:First working day

of January

Committee ActionHearings:

Code Developmentin April-May

Public CommentHearings:

Final Action inOctober-November

Codes updated ona three-year cycle CODE

Figure 1

16


cities may empower their fire codeofficial to enforce these codeswhile other communities mightdelegate the responsibility to thebuilding code official. Code enforcement is done

through permitting of new con-struction and maintenance inspec-tions in existing occupancies. With new construction, the

architectural drawings must be reviewed for code compliance. If the design does not meet code,then no building permit is issued.Once an approved building is

completed, a safety inspection ofthe building takes place. This inspection includes all of the lifesafety systems and will include the in-building communicationsenhancement networks. If all isgood, then the building is granted

a certificate of occupancy. If not,then it is back to work to fix theproblems.Should an existing building fall

into a grandfathered situation, itmay not be required to meet thelatest code. Grandfathering makespolitical sense for the municipalityas well as financial sense for thevenue owner according to DonnyJackson, Editor at Urgent Commu-nications. On the other hand, heobserves that “most structureswere built long before in-buildingcodes were implemented, whichmeans they will continue to bequite problematic for first respon-ders if grandfathering is allowed tocontinue.” 1.

Increasingly, such situationsusually are temporary as codesevolve to address indoor public-

safety communication gapswhereby once tenant improvementsare required, permitting and codecompliance is enforced. Many jurisdictions will enforce

code compliance through yearlyinspections that can uncover codeviolations from failing equipmentor poorly maintained networks.

PUBlIC SAFETy COmmUNICATIONSCODEBuilding owners must adhere to

the applicable municipal fire andlife safety codes, most of whichare well-established. But it is a different story when it comes topublic-safety communications.Claudio Lucente, an independent

consultant with Fiorel (Canada)points out, that there are evolvingcodes for public safety communi-cations. Without clear guidelines,he explained, many firefightersoperating inside buildings usetwo-way radios often in simplexmode where the radios communi-cate with each other on a one-to-one, or simplex, basis. This meansthat calls must be handed off tothe nearest radio instead of con-necting to each other over a net-work. If a firefighter gets intotrouble, they can still get help asthe call is passed from radio toradio, but it is not an idealarrangement.Lucente points out options for

improving in-building communica-tions for two-way radios. High-powered radio repeaters mountedon emergency vehicles can boostsignals high into buildings so firstresponders can use their radios inbroadcast mode instead of simplexmode. Repeaters afford some improvement but still not an idealarrangement.The need for establishing effec-

tive public-safety communicationscodes is growing. Chief Alan Perdue, a retired Chief of GuilfordCounty Emergency Services in

mAkE DUST OR EAT DUST“Our best chance to accomplishour collective goals will come from all of us working together. If every stakeholder is not involved and invested in theprocess, the results will continueto be all over the place. The resulting impact will be an

unnecessary increased cost to in-building projects in the form of re-do installations, systems that donot work as designed and AhJs denying a certificateof occupancy which has a significant impact on the venue owners says Chief Perdue. “If you aretraveling down a dirt road, you can either make the dust or eat the dust. It’s about being out front,engaged and charting your own course.”

chief Alan Perdue

17


Greensboro, North Carolina andcurrently the Executive Director of the Safer Building Coalition.,advocates for in-building commu-nications coverage within thecode. “If public-safety personnelcan obtain signals while operatingoutside the building, you musthave them inside in order to complete their mission.” He high-lights that fact that police, fire andemergency medical service (EMS)teams on scene often are commu-nicating on different frequenciesincluding VHF/UHF and 800 MHztrunked radio. This means thatthese different groups “are at timesunable to talk to each other.” Chief Perdue also recognizes thatnot one communication systemssize fits all because it depends onthe building and other demo-graphics of the jurisdiction. Ultimately, first responders “need a common public-safety platform,regardless of frequency.”He points out that the problem

is that the codes are not uniform,they are always in a state of continuous improvement, andthey take time to develop, adoptand implement. For instance, ICCcalls for in-building signal coverageof 95 percent while NFPA stipulates90 percent coverage except in critical areas such as a controlroom or pump room, then the requirement is 99 percent cover-age. Battery backup is anotherissue. “What does it need to be, 12 hours or 24 hours? Twice thebattery capacity means twice thespace required.”That sentiment is echoed by

John Facella, principal at PantherPines Consulting with deep expe-rience and expertise in publicsafety. “Providing in-building coverage is not trivial,” he says.“There are several technologiesfrom which to chose – DAS,BDAs, passive systems.” He points out however that in-

building wireless was mentionedin four different NFPA codes andstandards (NFPA 1, 72, 1221, and5000) and often with conflictinglanguage. NFPA is moving tocorrect the situation: the 2016 edition of NFPA 1221 will containthe detailed in-building require-ments, and the 2016 edition ofNFPA 72 will contain a referenceto go to 1221 for the in-buildingrequirements details. The NFPAprevious language referencedBDAs and was not digital (P25)friendly. The changes includeadding DAS to the in-buildingtechnologies mentioned, and accommodate both analog anddigital P25 technologies. Setting a standard for acceptable

in-building wireless performanceis a challenge. Facella explainsthat, in the original language, testing involved measuring the RFsignal in dBm but RF alone doesnot equate to transmission quality.“Can my dispatch hear them? Canthe rest of my team hear them? Do they sound excited?” So systemperformance testing specificationsnow takes into account deliveredaudio quality (DAQ) that does notrely on an RF engineer to conductthe test, and it actually measureswhat counts, what the user actu-ally hears.

IBW ImPERATIvECodes for in-building wireless

for public-safety communicationsare evolving. We all need to geton board.This starts with demystifying

codes, standards and ordinances,and helping stakeholders under-stand what is required to comply.Because codes are not uniformand, instead, the IFC and NFPAlanguage is adopted at the state orlocal level, no repeatable nation-wide much less statewideprocesses exist for industry to design and deploy indoor public-

safety solutions. Each set of codesis “custom” and therefore each in-building project is custom. The late Jack Daniel, according

to Urgent Communications’ Jackson “advocated the adoptionof local codes mandating systemsin buildings that would supportpublic-safety communicationswhen first responders were withinthe confines of the structure.”Daniel was a leading authoritywho published a clearinghousereference database for the currentlocal ordinances and codes for in-building public-safety coveragefor virtually every municipality.This information significantly provided clarity to the stakehold-ers but, alas, the work has notbeen advanced since his passing. Similarly, venues need to

prepare for public safety. At aminimum, the new building designs should include accommo-dation for public-safety communi-cations infrastructure: cablerunways above ceilings and incable risers or elevator shafts, potential antenna placements inwork spaces or common areas,and space allocations for equip-ment and power.Exactly what type of IBW systemwill be installed depends on thebuilding, the applicable localcodes and the specific perform-ance requirements.

1. Donny Jackson, “Incentives Needed to BolsterIn-building Communications for First Responders”, Urgent Communications (October 15, 2013)

18


Multiple business models existfor funding and owning indoorcommercial cellular networks, andthese models are evolving basedon factors such as stakeholdermarket strategies as well as marketconditions and the dynamics ofvarious market segments. Address-ing the unfunded mandate for in-door public-safety communications,however, reveals the absence of a business case. Someone will undoubtedly have to fund the effort, and therefore precedentsand initiatives must be identified

to change the stakeholder outlookparadigm to inspire rather thansimply require these investments.The importance of in-buildingwireless communications for public safety cannot be overstated.An estimated 80 percent of allwireless calls originate or terminateinside buildings. Similarly, a major-ity of emergency incidents occurindoors. Creating safer in-buildingenvironments for occupants andfirst responders is a clear impera-tive and it is the mission of theSafer Buildings Coalition, an

independent, non-profit organiza-tion focused on advancing policiesand ideas that lead to more largeand medium sized buildings beingserved with commercial and public-safety wireless coverage. Put simply, building occupants

need in-building cellular coveragenot only as a matter of conven-ience or a business requirement,but also as a vital link for public-safety communications. To wit,when faced with an emergency,building occupants will turn firstto their smartphone to call or text

FUNDING AND OWNINGIN-BUIlDING

PUBlIC-SAFETy NETWORkSWhen the conversation turns to in-building wireless networks, it’s virtually impossible to avoid

the topic of funding and ownership – whether commercial cellular or public safety.

19


for help. Similarly first respondersrequire in-building coverage fortheir public-safety two-way radiocommunications – particularly inthe places where emergency per-sonnel typically operate such asstairwells and parking garages. Getting there requires wireless

connectivity for both groups: commercial cellular and publicsafety. The question and challengearound funding and ownership iswhether industry stakeholders canfind a model where the two canmeet to establish a mutually beneficial business case. Jonathan Adelstein, President

and CEO of PCIA - The WirelessInfrastructure Association, observes that the goals of publicsafety and commercial wirelessneed to be met. “What we want to see is a win-win where there is a business case that enables[commercial in-building wirelessnetworks] to be available to public safety but, at the same time,commercial networks do this in a way that is profitable and that ultimately succeeds in the market-place with liability protection ex-tended to prevent unfair litigation.”

FUNDING mODElS FOR COmmERCIAl CEllUlAR IN-BUIlDING WIRElESSThe in-building wireless indus-

try is predicated upon the businessgoal of generating revenue and re-ducing churn for wireless opera-tors by keeping customersconnected indoors. The ROImodel for deploying in-buildingsolutions has traditionally focusedon very large venues having morethan 500,000 square feet wheremany people congregate such asstadiums, airports, subways, shop-ping malls, casinos, conventioncenters and larger hospitals andhotels. Typically, these networkshave been funded and owned bya wireless operator or third party

owner (3PO) as a “neutral host”whose network other operatorspay to plug into.A perfect storm is brewing,

however, influenced by cellulardevice subscribership that eclipses90 percent, bring your own device(BYOD) workplace initiatives andsaturation of in-building wirelessnetworks within the large venuemarket segment, which revealsthat a new tier of venues is begin-ning to be targeted. Known as the“Middleprise” and characterized asvenues having between venuesbetween 100,000 and 500,000square feet, this segment – whichconsists of hotels, hospitals, colleges,retail and multi-level class A office towers – represents a $20Bmarket, of which less than 2% has been tapped. In addition tonew technology solution consider-ations, funding and ownershipmodels within the Middleprise are also changing.Funding and ownership within

the Middleprise is likely going tofall upon the shoulders of thevenue owner. That’s because wireless operator and 3PO businessmodels, which are often optimizedto generate revenue through advertising, won’t correlate todrive ROI within the middlepriseas successfully as within the largevenues space. “It depends on therequirements of a particular area,”says Rusty Stone, Telecommunica-tions and Technical Project Man-ager for the Camden Property

Trust, a Houston, Texas-basedproperty management and devel-opment firm that operates 168communities with more than62,000 apartments across 10 statesand the District of Columbia.Who pays for the DAS? “We do”,

says Stone. “But we are open toworking with someone else whocan make that happen. We don’twant to own the system. We don’twant to touch it. We don’t havethe staff to design it or maintainit.”

FUNDING mODElS FOR PUBlIC-SAFETy IN-BUIlDING WIRElESSIndoor public safety communi-

cations is an unfunded mandatewhose financial burden is typicallyabsorbed by the venue owner. Areview of the stakeholders mightsuggest this is appropriate. Afterall, for new construction, the cer-tificate of occupancy (CO) hingesupon compliance with fire andbuilding codes. Besides, the fund-ing of in-building wireless net-works may already be understood:consider the aforementioned Mid-dleprise business model for com-mercial cellular where the venueowner will probably pay for thein-building network. Others, how-ever, believe that the cost of pub-lic-safety in-building networksshould be shared. Who’s right?Whether for cellular or public

safety, Camden’s Stone believesthat, at a minimum, the building

COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL PUBLIC Method: LARGE VENUE MIDDLEPRISE SAFETY Carrier • 3PO • • Venue • • • Shared • • •Funding sources for commercial cellular and Public Safety in-Building networks.

20


owner should provide the buildingand fire code-compliant rooms forthe DAS equipment and pathwaysfor cabling. Stone says that whenyou design a DAS, you need tounderstand the public-safety part.“It doesn’t cost that much more toinstall an antenna array to accom-modate cellular in future, maybean additional 15-20 percent on theinitial installation.” His philosophyis, “Let’s pre-wire with coaxialcable, splitters, antennas in theceiling, and IDF closets so we areready for plug-and-play. Our chal-lenge as developers is to bring aproject from conception to realityin about 24 months. But it’s amoving target – macros change,DAS technologies change. Thequestion is, What to do?”Is it feasible to share the net-

work assets as a means to sharethe costs by reducing network infrastructure costs as PCIA’s Adelstein proposed? For instance,sharing commercial and public-safety network assets within abuilding whereby the same network used for commercial cellular can enable the public-safety requirement at an approach-able nominal incremental cost. Or – thinking outside of the box –a citywide establish in-buildingpublic-safety network operator oran entirely new business modelwhere the cost of the system andthe operation is 3rd party managed.Should the financial burden rest,

in fact, with the venue owner, it isnot without precedent. Chief AlanPerdue a retired Chief of GuilfordCounty Emergency Services inGreensboro, North Carolina andcurrently the Executive Director ofthe Safer Building Coalition sug-gests that in-building networks canbecome a life safety system likefire sprinkler systems. Sprinkler systems are common-

place in nearly every jurisdiction inNorth America. In fact, many evenhave the requirements for singlefamily residential dwellings. Butthis was not always the case. Assprinkler systems became an occu-pancy requirement, building own-ers, engineers, contactors andtenants recognized the need aswell as the benefits. Over time, thecode addressing sprinkler systemshas been revised and updated,and virtually all new constructionand renovations projects withinthe large venue and Middleprisemarkets – which are (or will be)affected by indoor public-safetycommunications mandates – arerequired to meet the code. Thecost of fire sprinklers has longbeen absorbed by the venueowner. Will the cost for in-buildingwireless networks supporting pub-lic safety in time follow suit? A case can be made whereby

venue owners should benefit fordeploying indoor public-safetycommunication networks throughincentives, regardless of whether

we consider it a moral obligationor a code requirement for buildingoccupancy. Donny Jackson, editorat Urgent Communications, ob-served that, “This should not be asimple mandate… rather, any suchrules should include incentives tospur existing building owners totake such action, such as tax cred-its and/or insurance breaks.Frankly, it is surprising that a struc-ture that does not support public-safety communications would paythe same insurance rates as onethat does.” Lastly, as PCIA's Adelstein

suggests, liability protection shouldbe extended to any venue ownerfor deploying an indoor network tofulfill the public safety imperative -akin to a "Good Samaritan Law."

ThE IN-BUIlDING WIRElESS ImPERATIvEAlthough today we wrestle with

challenges that include technol-ogy, funding, litigation and net-work maintenance when it comesto solving for indoor public-safetycommunications, we believe thatten years from now, we won’t bethinking about the cost or evenbuildings without a public-safetywireless network. Today’s Imperative is clear.

Codes must be written to ensurebuilding occupants and first re-sponders can effectively communi-cate in times of emergency.Technology needs to drive solu-tions with a lower TCO while im-proving performance. And thecommercial real estate ecosystemmust embrace in-building public-safety and commercial in-buildingnetworks, and recognize theirvalue and ROI potential. With FirstNet, we’re at a revolu-

tionary point of change. It is vitalthat indoors does not get left be-hind.

“The discussion is not what it cost toinstall a DAS, but rather what’s the costof not providing an in-building networkto support public safety.”

chief Alan PerdueExecutive Director of Safer Buildings coalition

CASE STUDy:

DC WATERAChIEvING QUAlITy RF COvERAGE

IN A hARSh UNDERGROUND ENvIRONmENT

QUICk FACTS: DC WATERIN-BUIlDING WIRElESS SOlUTION

• System: SOLiD Technologies’ALLiAncE Multi-carrier DAS

• head-end: ALLiAncE head-end with multiple BDA inputs, Main and Backup

• Remote Units: 19 ALLiAncE remotes

• no. of Sectors: One (1) sector

• Fiber cable: More than 20,000 feet, single mode

• coaxial cable: More than 10,000 feet

• Battery Back-up: Four (4) hours

22


The District of Columbia (DC)’sWater and Sewer Authority, calledDC Water, operates one of themost advanced wastewater treat-ment plants in the world. It is alsoa highly visible target according toreports citing anti-terrorist experts. Known as Blue Plains Advanced

Wastewater Treatment Plant, thesystem serves more than two million Washington metro area residents in the District of Columbia along with suburbs inadjoining Northern Virginia andMaryland.Blue Plains has a capacity to

treat 370 million gallons of sewagea day through a series of largetreatment pools in several buildingsspread over an expansive site andconnected by over three miles oftunnels and underground facilities.

ThE PROBlEm:The tunnels house all of the

underground facilities for theTreatment Plant – pipes for movingsewage and water, and transporta-tion for workers between the vari-ous facilities. While in the tunnels,workers must be able to commu-nicate with supervisors and withcolleagues who are both in thetunnels and above ground.The workers use handheld

radios that operate on 700-800 MHzfrequencies licensed by the DC Office of Unified Communications(OUC). Workers who were aboveground could not communicatewith their co-workers in the tunnels.More important, by code,

DC Water must provide communi-cations for public-safety purposes.Radios must work to allow accessto supervisors and dispatch. Fireand police need coverage wheneverand wherever they were on site.

ThE SOlUTION:Morcom International, a wireless

system integrator, proposed thewireless solution that ultimately

was selected by DC Water. Morcom designed and installed the ALLIANCE™ multi-carrier distributedantenna system (DAS)manufactured bySOLiD. Donor antennas were installed aboveground to pick upOUC frequenciesfrom several sites inthe city on a line-of-sight (LOS) basis.These radio frequency (RF) signals were fed into bi-directionalamplifiers (BDAs)installed at the DAShead-end. The head-end equip-ment converts the RF to opticalsignals that are transmitted overfiber optic cables to the DAS remote units. The DAS remoteunits then convert the opticalsignals back to RF which is fed toindoor antennas that are strategi-cally located through the tunnels.“The biggest challenge in locating

the antennas is that the tunnels arenot level”, said Manuel Ojeda,Morcom’s President. “Tunnels areat different elevations with a lot ofups and downs between them,and sharp curves in the tunnels soyou do not have very good line-of-sight transmission between theworkers’ radios and nearby indoorantennas. We ended putting a lot ofantennas throughout the tunnelsto achieve quality RF coverage.”RF coverage in the tunnels

could have been achieved usingradiating coaxial cable but therewas concern that these cableswould corrode over time in such aharsh underground environment.As well, there was a chance that

underground RF signals could radiate above ground and causeinterference. Designing a DAS allowed Morcom more controlover antenna placements, and isolation between frequencies in the tunnel system and outsidefrequencies.A single SOLiD system proved

to be a viable way of accommo-dating different frequency bands,both the OUC 760-860 MHz andpublic safety 800 MHz. DC Waterworkers now use the same P25handsets (Motorola Solutions’APX-4000 and APX-6000) as theirD.C. police and fire counterparts.More important, the SOLiD ALLIANCE system has the capabilityto add commercial cellular frequencies in future.Ojeda pointed out that DC

Water may want to add Wi-Fi tothe tunnels at some point. “Thatwould be a separate system fromthe SOLiD equipment but the Wi-Fi system could use extra fiberstrands in the fiber optic cable thatwas installed for the DAS”.

Power backup unit with SOLiD ALLiAncE remote.

DC WATER WORkERS NOWUSE ThE SAmE P25 hANDSETSAS ThEIR D.C. POlICE ANDFIRE COUNTERPARTS.

For more information, read the detailed case study at: http://www.solid.com/resources/case-studies.html

23


1221 Committee - A national Fire Protection Association (nFPA) committee focused on creat-ing a standard for the installation, maintenance,and use of emergency services communicationssystems. 1802 Committee – A national Fire Protection Association (nFPA) committee focused on creat-ing a standard for personal portable (hand-held)two-way radio communications devices used byemergency services personnel in the hazardzone.4G LTE - A term used to describe the 4th genera-tion of cellular network technology, consideredthe Long Term Evolution strategy of mobile high-speed data networked for mobile commu-nications.700 MHz D Block Band 14 - A 10Mhz portion allocated in the upper 700Mhz spectrum adjacent to the current licensed public safetyband that is not yet in service. Public safety could use the added spectrum to support a nationwide broadband network and expand the current public safety spectrum.800 MHz Trunked Radio – A unique radio repeater system that allows semi private communications between more groups of users than there are allocated frequencies. Thisenables many users to communicate over fewerfrequencies by sharing the bandwidth of thetrunked system.BBU - Base Band Unit: Acts like a “digital” BTSand functions like a switch or a router at the DASconnection to the network.BBU Hotel – A network topology concept thatcentralizes multiple BBUs to provide access tomultiple DAS and small cell locations networkedwith a fiber backhaul.BDA - Bi-directional Amplifier: Also known as acell phone signal booster or amplifier in the cellphone industry, it is a device used for boostingthe cell phone reception to the local area byusing a reception antenna, a signal amplifier, andan internal rebroadcast antenna. BICSI - Building industry consulting Services in-ternational: An organization that establishedbest practices and standards for in-buildingstructured cabling systems.C-RAN - centralized Radio Access network: A centralized, cloud computing based new radioaccess network (commonly known as cellularnetwork) architecture that can support 2G, 3G,4G system and future wireless communicationstandards. it provides access to multiple wirelesstechnologies to increase capacity issues of tradi-tional macro cell networks.CPRI - common Public Radio interference: A standard that defines the interface of base sta-tions between the Radio Equipment controllers(REc) in the standard, to local or remote radiounits, known as Radio Equipment (RE). it is a pro-prietary protocol that each manufacturer uses toenable communications between BBU’s and RRU.DAS - Distributed Antenna System: A network ofspatially separated antenna nodes connected toa common source via a transport medium thatprovides wireless service within a geographicarea or structure with improved reliability. A distributed antenna system may be deployedindoors (an iDAS) or outdoors (an oDAS).Donor Antenna - An antenna located on the exterior of a structure that is used to relay the in-building networks traffic to a known public safetybase station or repeater tower or cellular tower. E-911 - Enhanced 911: A system used in northAmerica that links emergency callers with the

appropriate public resources. Mandated by theFcc, it requires that mobile caller be identifiableby the dialing number and their location. FirstNet - First Responder network Authority:created as an independent authority within thenational Telecommunications and informationAdministration (nTiA) to establish, operate, andmaintain a high-speed, nationwide interoperablepublic safety broadband network for emergencyand daily public safety communications.Head-end - Generic term for the demarcationpoint of a DAS network where much of theequipment resides that receives communica-tions signals for distribution to a local region.IBC - international Building code: A model build-ing code developed by the international codecouncil (icc) that establishes minimal regula-tions for building systems. A large portion of theiBc deals with fire prevention.iDAS – A distributed antenna system (DAS) that isdeployed indoors. IFC - international Fire code: A comprehensivefire code that establishes minimum regulationsfor fire prevention and fire protection systemsusing prescriptive and performance-related provisions. it addresses conditions hazardous tolife and property from fire, explosion, handlingor use of hazardous materials and the use andoccupancy of buildings and premises. In-Building Wireless - A generic phrase to covermultiple RF networks that provide coveragewithin a structure or building.Indoor Antenna - An antenna that is mounted onthe wall or ceiling and can be omni-directional.Middleprise - The new industry term for the enterprise market defined as venues having100k to 500k square feet, where neither conven-tional DAS nor Small cells offer optimal solutions.MIMO - Multiple input-Multiple Output: A method for multiplying a radio’s capacity usingmultiple transmit and receive antennas.NEC - national Electric code: A regionally adopt-able standard used as the benchmark for safeelectrical design, installation, and inspection. it was published by the national Fire ProtectionAssociation for the safe installation of electricalwiring and equipment in the United States. NEMA 4 - A standard for equipment housings andenclosures that stipulates watertight constructioncapable of withstanding 65GPM of water from a1” nozzle from a distance of no less than 10 feetfor 5 minutes.NFPA 1 - The national Fire Protection Associationcode that covers a complete range of life safetycriteria for fire protection systems equipmentand occupant safety in new and existing buildings.NFPA 72 - The national Fire Protection Associations code that covers emergency communication systems and signaling. it specifiesthe application, installation, location, performance,inspection, testing, and maintenance of firealarm systems, fire warning equipment, emer-gency warning equipment, and their components.oDAS - A distributed antenna system (DAS) thatis deployed outdoors. P25 - (also known as APcO-25 or Project 25) Along standing partnership between the publicsafety communications community and industrymanufacturers established with a common goalof meeting the requirements of mission criticalinteroperable LMR systems to allow for commu-nication between agencies and mutual aid re-sponse teams in emergencies.PIM - Passive intermodulation: A form of signaldistortion or interference that occurs in passive

components that degrade the quality of the signal, typically caused by poor manufacturingquality of materials or environmental corrosionof connectors and cabling.RRU - Remote Radio Unit: A radio node on a DASnetwork providing RF power and connectivity tothe distributed antennas.RSSI/RCPI - Receive Signal Strength indicator/Received channel Power indicator: RSSi is thearbitrary measurement of the received signalpower in a wireless network (think “bars”, but the bars are not exact values and vary betweendevices and network). RcPi is a more exactmeasure and is exclusively associated with iEEE’s802.11 WiFi protocol.Safer Buildings Coalition - An independent,non-profit organization focused on advancingpolicies and ideas that lead to more large build-ings being served with commercial and publicsafety wireless coverage.Signal Booster - A device used for boosting thecell phone reception to the local area by theusage of a reception antenna, a signal amplifier,and an internal rebroadcast antenna. These aresimilar to the cellular broadcast towers used forbroadcasting by the network providers, but aremuch smaller, usually intended for use in onebuilding. Small Cell - Low-powered radio access nodesthat operate in licensed and unlicensed spectrumthat have a range of 10 meters to 1 or 2 kilometers.They are "small" compared to a mobile macro-cell, which may have a range of tens of kilometers.They transmit and receive cellular frequenciesand require a backhaul communication link tothe network. Small cells are a vital element to 3G data offloading, and many mobile networkoperators see small cells as vital to managing LTE Advanced spectrum more efficiently thanusing just macrocells.SNR – Signal-to-noise ratio: A measure used tocompare the level of a desired signal to the levelof background noise. it is defined as the ratio ofsignal power to the noise power, often expressed in decibels. A ratio higher than 1:1(greater than 0 dB) indicates more signal thannoise.Splitters/Combiners - components of the physical coaxial infrastructure used to distributeRF signals to the antennas while balancing andmaintaining the required signal power.UHF - Ultra high frequency: The designation forradio frequencies in the range between 300 Mhzand 3 Ghz, commonly used for television broad-casting, cell phones, satellite communication in-cluding GPS, personal radio services includingWi-Fi and Bluetooth, walkie-talkies, cordlessphones, and numerous other applications. UhFradio waves propagate mainly by line of sight;they are blocked by hills and large buildings al-though the transmission through building wallsis high enough for indoor reception.VHF - Very high frequency: The range of theradio spectrum is the band extending from 30Mhz to 300 Mhz. common uses are FM radiobroadcasting, television broadcasting, and two-way LMR radios for public safety and commercial business use.Wi-Fi - Wireless Fidelity: A term used to describeany type of 802.11 standard wireless network.Products tested and approved as "Wi-Fi certi-fied" (a registered trademark) are certified as interoperable with each other even if they arefrom different manufacturers.

Glossary of Terms: In-Building Wireless for Public Safety

SOLiD800 Klein Road, Suite 200

Plano, TX 75074888.409.9997

Connect with SOLiD

SOLiD helps keep people stay connected and safe in a rapidly-changing world through a portfolio ofRF Ampli�er, RF Radio and Optical Transport solutions. SOLiD enables indoor and outdoor cellular and

public-safety communications at some of the world’s best-known and most challenging venues includingleading hospitals; professional, and college sports venues; government, university and Fortune 500 corporate

buildings and campuses; international airports and metropolitan subways; and other high-pro�le sites.

For further information on SOLiD DAS, Backhaul and Fronthaul solutions,go to www.solid.com or call 888.409.9997.

solid.com

building wireless and public safety solid imperative › wp-content › uploads › solid... · the...

Documents