Office Room Channel Modeling and Object Attenuation at Sub-THz Frequencies
, Emmeric Tanghe 1, Claude Desset 2, André Bourdoux 2, David Plets 1 and Wout Joseph 1Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper presents D-band measurements in an office environment, for
Line-of-Sight, obstructed LOS and reflected NLOS paths.
The research field is important and up-to-date. There are only a few comments relating to the manuscript:
1.) The authors compare the results with the single-frequency floating-intercept (FI) model and with the multi-frequency alpha-beta-gamma (ABG) model. Nevertheless the ITU-R Recommendation P.1238 is not mentioned, however it is valid for the 300MHz-450GHz range for indoor usage and for different environments, like the office as well. Please clarify, why this model is not mentioned in the article.
2.) The article provides measurement results with obstructed path for multiple universal serial bus (USB) cables and computer keyboard. The exact location of these objects in the propagation path are not specified, therefore the reproducibility of the measurements seems to be difficult. I recommend to describe more precisely the investigated environment.
3.) In Eq. 5. the attenuation is calculated with the difference of the measured path loss and the free space loss. Here I recommend again to study the ITU-R Recommendation P.1238, because for millimeter wavelength indoor propagation it recommends a different calculation method and equation.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors present D-band measurements in an office environment, characterizing LOS, obstructed LOS and reflected NLOS paths.
The paper is well-written and the measurements support the presented results and conclusions.
My only remark is to reorganize the introduction section, maybe add a section or subsection about related work and move the sentence “In this paper, we consider wireless…” from the first paragraph to the paragraphs that come later.
The methodology section is very well presented and provides enough information for understanding the scenarios.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper show the results of a set of measurements with full D-band. LoS obstructed and reflected have been measured. Diffraction is also measured in this work.
Some minor typing mistakes:
line 97: "i.e" -> "i.e."
line 150: "dB , a PL" -> "dB, a PL"
- Acronyms are well used (defined at their first use, etc.), except "ABG", that is not defined in the abstract, although it is included in de Abbreviations append. In that append, the following are missing, although perhaps they are not relevant: RF, LO.
However, an acronym could be used for "free-space path loss (FSPL)" instead of "free space PL", which appears many times (lines 128, 138, 166, 166, 168, 198, 203, 234, 254, 260). On the contrary, some acronyms are defined multiple times, like LOS (5, 25, 89, 194, 196, 259), and some times it is not used (Caption of Figures and Tables).
- Figures are good (showing units, etc.).
- Bibliography: "MacCartney" is written as "Maccartney" (lines 32 and 302 [5]).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
