Wireless Underwater Communications and Networks: Current Achievements and Future Research Challenges

Milica Stojanovic Massachusetts Institute of Technology millitsa@mit.edu

Overview
Introduction Channel characteristics Signal processing: bandwidth-efficient underwater acoustic communications Underwater networks: channel sharing and multiple-access Future research and open problems

Background
Motivation: Major scientific discoveries of the past decade (e.g., hydrothermal vents): cabled submersibles Cables are heavy, deployment is expensive Wireless information transmission through the ocean: Remote control of robots, vehicles Remote data retrieval Wireless communication: radio (30Hz-300Hz, very high attenuation) optical (short distance, pointing precision) acoustic History: underwater telephone (analog modulation, 8-11 kHz). DSP technology: acoustic modems (few kbps/few km). Research growing with new applications (and vice versa).

Applications: ocean observation

Environmental monitoring climate recording pollution control prediction of natural disasters oil/gas fields harbor protection Scientific data collection oceanography geo-sciences (physics/chemistry) marine biology

Search and survey, military and nonmilitary detection of objects Underwater exploration ocean bottom imaging and discovery of natural resources mapping marine phenomena deep-sea archaeology

Underwater wireless networks

Today: point-to-point acoustic links Future: autonomous networks for ocean observation Examples of future networks: ad hoc deployable sensor networks autonomous fleets of cooperating AUVs

Types of nodes: fixed, slowly moving, mobile sensors, relays, gateways Types of signals, system requirements: low/high rate (~100 bps-100kbps) real-time/non real-time high/moderate reliability Configurations: stand alone integrated (e.g., cabled observatories)
NSF ITR: Acoustic networks, navigation and sensing for multiple autonomous underwater robotic vehicles.

Communication channel
Physical constraints of acoustic propagation: limited, range-dependent bandwidth time-varying multipath low speed of sound (1500 m/s)
70 5km 60 10km 50

B>1/Tmp frequency-selective fading

relative SNR [dB]

40

30

50km

20 100km 10

A(d,f)~dka(f)d N(f)~Kf-b

Worst of both radio worlds (land mobile / satellite)

18 20

8 10 12 frequency [kHz]

14

16

t t(1v/c) f f(1v/c)

System constraints: transducer bandwidth battery power half-duplex

Summary of channel characteristics

Channel parameter Acoustic/radio difference Implications for signal processing, network design

Bandwidth/SNR

Bandwidth severely limited Bandwidth depends on distance

Need for data compression, bandwidth-efficient modulation Network topology selection, resource sharing and reuse Adaptive equalization, array processing Need for dynamic protocols, x-layer optimization Synchronization (phase, delay) Channel feedback latency Throughput efficiency of network protocols

Fading/multipath

ISI spans tens of symbols Fading/outage models not known Typical v/c value higher by several orders of magnitude, severe Doppler distortion Very long propagation delay

Speed of sound

Signal processing for high-rate underwater acoustic communications

Bandwidth-efficient modulation (Rb/B>1 bps/Hz ): PSK, QAM Coherent detection: decision-feedback equalization phase and delay synchronization
. . . . ~ d(n) decision e j (n) phase correction error Joint MMSE adaptation of equalizer, synchronizer + feedback filter data decision

input signal (baseband) v(t) 2/T x sampling

feedforward filter

data estimate ^ d(n)

b
d(n) training data

(IEEE JOE 94, with J.Proakis, J.Catipovic).

inp.1 inp.2

combiner

forward

data est.

data out

Multi-channel combining
inp. K sync.

+
forward filter coefficients adaptation algorithm

decision

feedback

training data

Example: New England Continental Shelf

(JASA 95, with J.Proakis, J.Catipovic)

Current achievements
Point-to-point (2/4/8PSK;8/16/64QAM) medium range (1 km-10 km ~ 10 kbps) long range (10 km 100 km ~1 kbps) basin scale (3000 km ~ 10 bps) vertical (3 km~15kbps, 10 m~150 kbps) Mobile communications AUV to AUV at 5 kbps Multi-user communications five users, each at 1.4 kbps in 5 kHz band WHOI micro-modem: Fixed point DSP low rate FSK (~100 bps) w/noncoherent detection Floating point co-processor high rate PSK (~5000 bps) w/coherent detection (adaptive DFE, Doppler tracking, coding) 4-channel input 10-50 W tx / 3W rx (active) 1.75 in x 5 in.

Research in signal processing Goals: low complexity processing improved performance better bandwidth utilization Specific topics: spread spectrum communications (CDMA, LPD) multiple tx/rx elements (MIMO) multi-carrier modulation (OFDM)

Multi-carrier modulation / orthogonal frequency division multiplexing

Available bandwidth divided into narrow sub-bands: channel appears ideal (flat) in each sub-band OFDM: efficient implementation via FFT
S P mod f0 demod f0 dec

mod f1 +

demod f1

dec

P S

+Low-complexity equalization (frequency-domain) -High sensitivity to frequency offset High-rate acoustic system is inherently wideband (UWB): Doppler distortion is not uniform across sub-bands
mod fK-1 IFFT demod fK-1 FFT dec

Experiment: Buzzards Bay 05

output scatter plot

MSEtime [dB] 0 10 20 30

in 1

FFT

. . . K

c o m b i n e r

out 1
Im

10

dec

20 block index

30

0 MSEfrequency [dB] 1 0 10 20 30 1 0 Re 1 2

2 2

200

400 600 800 subchannel index

1000

Adaptive channel tracking, Doppler compensation (v/c)

4 2 0 2

phase estimates [rad] top: subchannel K1 bottom: subchannel 0 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0

channel estimates (abs.)

1 . . .

10 20 block index
5

30

500 subchannel index

1000

x 10

aestimate System parameters: M=12 receiver elements K=1024 subchannels (32 blocks) no overlap add pilot channels: 0 phase difference filtering: 0 channel tracking: 0.99 MSE: 16.3 dB SER: 0

in M

FFT

c o m b i n e r

0 2

dec

out K

10 20 block index

30

30+ kbps / 2.5 km @ minimal complexity

(work in progress; IEEE Oceans 06)

Future autonomous underwater systems: network topologies

Centralized Decentralized

Nodes communicate via a central station (cellular network paradigm). Channel must be sharedregulation of multiple access. Central stations are connected through a separate infrastructure (cable on the bottom, radio on the surface).

Nodes communicate through neighbors (ad hoc network paradigm). Messages must be relayed to reach destinationregulation of channel access. There may be an end node to gateway. Nodes may form clusters.

Open problems (There are no operational autonomous underwater networks, only isolated experimental demonstrations): Capacity of an acoustic network? (Energy and bandwidth depend on inter-node distance.) Efficient and scalable channel sharing protocols? (Speed of sound is five orders of magnitude less than speed of electro-magnetic waves.)

Network architecture
Node A Network layer Node B Network layer Node C Network layer
Routingpath selection (end-to-end throughput, delay)

Data link layer

Data link layer

Data link layer

Automatic Repeat Request (ARQ) Medium Access Control (MAC) (throughput, packet error rate)

Physical layer

Physical layer

Physical layer

Modulation/detection (bit rate, bit error rate)

Each layer assumes perfect operation of the layer below. There may be a total of five or more layers (transport, application).

Channel sharing (access regulation)

Deterministic/scheduling Multiple access: frequency, time code division (FDMA, TDMA, CDMA); also space division. Continuous traffic, fixed number of users Complex, low overhead Scalability? Spatial reuse for efficient resource allocation (power, bandwidth).
U1 U2 UN

Random/contention Aloha, Carrier Sensing Multiple Access (CSMA), Multiple access with Collision Avoidance (MACA) Bursty traffic, variable number of users Simple, high overhead (RTS/CTS) Scalable.

U1

X Probe U2

Data2(n)

Guard A sends RTS, including packet length. B hears, replies with CTS including packet length; C hears B, defers transmission to let B receive data packet.

Ex: N<5 for 10 sec. updating, 1km x1km, 1 sec. packet

The two strategies can be combined: reservation-based protocols.

Medium Access Control (MAC)

Acoustic channel: extremely long delay collisions should be avoided Aloha: does not avoid collisions CSMA: good only when delay << packet duration MACA: to avoid collisions must have RTS/CTS > delay (control packet > data packet!) Collisions waste time and energy Slotted MACA: slot > delay + RTS/CTS Q: What tx power to use? Criterion: max. throughput (packet time / average time for successful transmission)

Simulation: 16 AUVs, 5km x 5km, 5 kt, random direction change, 1 kbps.

A: There exists optimal tx power, which can be calculated for a given system.

(IEEE Oceans 06, with M. Molins)

Reliable packet transmision

(IEEE Oceans 05)

Data link layer ARQ Acoustic modems: half-duplex ARQ based on Stop & Wait Acoustic channel: varying BER, long waiting time poor throughput efficiency = packet time / average time needed for successful packet transmission longer packet: better utilization of waiting time, but greater chances of packet error optimal packet length Selective S&W with M packets/group:
1 0.9

optimal packet size 5000

4500 solid: S&W1 dashed: S&W2, M=16 dotted: S&W2, M>inf.

4000

3500 lR=5e+5 mbps 3000

2500 lR=5e+4 mbps

2000

1500

1000

500

0 5

4.5

0.8

Rate:100 bps 1000 bps Distance: 500 m 5 km

solid: S&W1

3.5 log(Pe)

2.5

Pe=1e3
maximal throughput efficiency 1

0.7

0.9

dashed: S&W2, M=16

throughput efficiency

0.6

dotted: S&W3, M=16

0.8 lR=5e+4 mbps

0.7

0.5

top to bottom, lR [mbps]: 5e+4

0.6

0.4

5e+5 5e+6
0.5 lR=5e+5 mbps

0.3

0.4

0.2

0.3 solid: S&W1 dashed: S&W2, M=16 dotted:S&W2, M>inf.

0.1

0.2

0.1

500

1000 1500 packet size [symbols]

2000

2500
0 5 4.5 4 3.5 log(Pe) 3 2.5 2

Analytical results: Optimal packet size depends heavily on BER, rate-distance product. By increasing the group size M, the problem of delay can be overcome. Maximal throughput efficiency remains limited by BER.

Future work: Adaptive ARQ for time-varying channels. Practical implementations.

Experimental acoustic networks

No widely accepted channel models experimental demonstration remains de-facto standard. Need easily programmable and deployable networking platforms. Reconfigurable modem: Matlab Simulink + TI DSP=flexible, modular (software radio concept).
A/D and D/A board: 250 kHz sampling, 100 kHz max. frequency, 4 in/out channels.

Micro-line board: TMS 320C6713 floating-point DSP, Xilinx Virtex-II FPGA

Power supply carrier board (12-36 V).

Current software: Packetizing and packet synchronization PSK/DPSK, QAM modulation Multi-channel decision feedback equalization Convolutional coding, Viterbi decoding In progress: Doppler compensation, OFDM, FSK MACA protocol Hardware: power amplifier, transducer, housing.

5 x 2.5 in Matlab to C code: Real Time Workshop Compiling, downloading: Code Composer Studio

Future work (with E. Sozer): First field test: summer 06? Goals: open testing platform for signal processing algorithms, network protocols in-house acoustic network.

Open problems and future research

Fundamental questions: Statistical channel modeling Network capacity Research areas: Data compression Signal processing for communications: adaptive modulation / coding channel estimation / prediction multiple in/out channels (tx/rx arrays) multi-user communications communications in hostile environment Communication networks: network layout / resource allocation and reuse network architecture / cross layer optimization network protocols: all layers Experimental networks: System specification: typical vs. application-specific (traffic patterns, performance requirements) optimization criteria (delay, throughput, reliability, energy efficiency) Concept demonstration: simulation in-water prototypes System integration: Cabled observatories Integration of wireless communications: cabled backbone + mobile nodes = extended reach Wireless extension: acoustical and optical

Underwater optical communications: blue-green region (450-550 nm) +much higher bandwidth (~Mbps) +negligible delay -short distance (<100 m)

complementary to acoustics