Performance Analysis of MIMO UWOC Systems with Weak Turbulence Channels Using mQAM and Aperture Averaging

Jianying Wang; Hongxi Yin; Xiuyang Ji; Yanjun Liang; Lianyou Jing

doi:10.3788/AOS202141.1901002

Acta Optica Sinica, Volume. 41, Issue 19, 1901002(2021)

Performance Analysis of MIMO UWOC Systems with Weak Turbulence Channels Using mQAM and Aperture Averaging

Jianying Wang^1,2、**, Hongxi Yin^1、*, Xiuyang Ji¹, Yanjun Liang¹, and Lianyou Jing¹

Author Affiliations

¹School of Information and Communication Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning 116024, China

²College of Information Science and Engineering, Xinjiang University, Urumqi, Xinjiang 830046, China

show less

Abstract Get PDF(in Chinese)

Figures & Tables(16)

Fig. 1. Underwater turbulent QAM channel system structure

Download full size

Fig. 2. R_ABE curves with the change of ASNR. (a) Four rectangular mQAM modulation schemes; (b) five antenna configuration schemes

Download full size

Fig. 3. R_ABE curves with the change of A (P_s＝50 mW, L＝45 m). (a) Four rectangular mQAM modulation schemes; (b) five antenna configuration schemes

Download full size

Fig. 4. R_ABE versus transmitter power with different aperture diameters (coastal water, L＝50 m, 3×4 MIMO system)

Download full size

Fig. 5. R_ABE curve of 3×4 MIMO system under different transmitter powers. (a) R_ABE versus link distance L; (b) R_ABE versus aperture average factor A

Download full size

Fig. 6. Performance comparison of QAM and BPSK modulation systems. (a) R_ABE versus ASNR; (b) R_ABE versus link distance L

Download full size

Fig. 7. Curves of channel average capacity upper bound under different antenna number of system configuration. (a) 〈C_mn〉_maxversus ASNR; (b) 〈C_mn〉_maxversus aperture average factor A

Download full size

Fig. 8. Curves of channel average capacity upper bound versus link distance L in 3×2 MIMO system. (a) 〈C_mn〉_max in different transmitter power P_s;(b) 〈C_mn〉_max in different aperture diameter D_rx

Download full size

Fig. 9. Curves of channel average capacity upper bound versus aperture average factor A. (a) Four transmitter power P_s schemes; (b) four QAM modulation schemes; (c) four link distance L schemes; (d) four transmission rate R_b schemes

Download full size

Table 1. System simulation parameters

View table

Table 1. System simulation parameters

Parameter	Value	Parameter	Value
Electronic charge q /(10^－19 C)	1.602	APD’s average gain $\bar{g}$	80
Receiver effective bandwidth B /MHz	100	APD responsivity ℛ	0.8
Excess noise factor F_A	0.5	Wavelength λ /nm	532
Plane wave Rytov variance $σ_{R}^{2}$	0.1	Divergence angle θ /mrad	1.5

Table 2. Absorption, scattering and attenuation coefficients of the seawater
View table
Table 2. Absorption, scattering and attenuation coefficients of the seawater
Water type a(λ) /m^－1 b(λ) /m^－1 c(λ) /m^－1
Clear oceanic water 0.114 0.037 0.151
Coastal water 0.179 0.219 0.398
Turbid harbor water 0.366 1.824 2.190

Table 3. Minimum ASNR ${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ required by the system (four rectangular mQAM modulation schemes/five antenna configuration schemes)

View table

Table 3. Minimum ASNR ${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ required by the system (four rectangular mQAM modulation schemes/five antenna configuration schemes)

System	8QAM		16QAM		32QAM		64QAM
System	${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ /dB	R_ABE /10^－3	${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ /dB	R_ABE /10^－3	${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ /dB	R_ABE /10^－3	${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ /dB	R_ABE /10^－3
SISO	18	1.7	20	2.0	24	2.0	29	2.5
1×3 SIMO	13	1.6	15	1.8	19	1.9	24	2.5
3×2 MIMO	10	1.4	12	1.7	16	1.7	21	2.3
8×1 MISO	8	3.3	10	3.7	14	3.7	20	1.7
3×4 MIMO	7	1.4	9	1.6	13	1.6	18	2.2

Table 4. Minimum transmit power P_s，min in 3×4 MIMO system for different aperture diameters

View table

Table 4. Minimum transmit power P_s，min in 3×4 MIMO system for different aperture diameters

Modulation mode	D_rx＝5 mm		D_rx＝10 mm		D_rx＝15 mm		D_rx＝20 mm
Modulation mode	P_s，min /dBm	R_ABE /10^－3	P_s，min /dBm	R_ABE /10^－3	P_s，min /dBm	R_ABE /10^－3	P_s，min /dBm	R_ABE /10^－3
8QAM	27	2.3	21	2.2	17	3.7	15	2.2
16QAM	28	2.0	22	2.0	18	3.3	16	1.9
32QAM	31	2.1	25	2.1	21	3.4	19	2.0
64QAM	35	3.4	29	3.3	26	1.9	23	3.2

Table 5. Maximum effective link distance L_max under different transmitter powers P_s

View table

Table 5. Maximum effective link distance L_max under different transmitter powers P_s

Modulation mode	P_s＝10 dBm		P_s＝13 dBm		P_s＝16 dBm
Modulation mode	L_max /m	R_ABE /10^－3	L_max /m	R_ABE /10^－3	L_max /m	R_ABE /10^－3
8QAM	36.0	2.0	37.5	1.9	39.0	1.9
16QAM	35.5	1.7	37.0	1.6	38.5	1.6
32QAM	34.0	1.9	35.5	1.8	37.0	1.8
64QAM	33.5	2.3	35.0	2.3	36.5	2.3

Table 6. Maximum effective link distance L_max in different water types

View table

Table 6. Maximum effective link distance L_max in different water types

Modulation mode	Turbid harbor		Coastal ocean		Clear ocean
Modulation mode	L_max /m	R_ABE /10^－3	L_max /m	R_ABE /10^－3	L_max /m	R_ABE /10^－3
8QAM	8.6	2.0	39.8	3.4	93.8	3.9
16QAM	8.6	4.9	39.4	3.7	92.6	3.8
32QAM	8.2	1.4	37.8	3.3	88.6	3.9
64QAM	7.8	1.9	35.6	3.7	82.6	3.5

Table 7. Comparison of ${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ and L_max between QAM modulation and BPSK modulation (3×2 MIMO)
View table
Table 7. Comparison of ${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ and L_max between QAM modulation and BPSK modulation (3×2 MIMO)
Modulation mode ${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ L_max
8QAM 9 dB 38 m
16QAM 11 dB 38 m
32QAM 15 dB 36 m
BPSK 9 dB 36 m

Tools

Get Citation

Copy Citation Text

Jianying Wang, Hongxi Yin, Xiuyang Ji, Yanjun Liang, Lianyou Jing. Performance Analysis of MIMO UWOC Systems with Weak Turbulence Channels Using mQAM and Aperture Averaging[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2021, 41(19): 1901002

Download Citation

EndNote(RIS)BibTex Plain Text

Set citation alerts for article

Save article for my favorites

Paper Information

Category: Atmospheric Optics and Oceanic Optics

Received: Mar. 12, 2021

Accepted: Apr. 21, 2021

Published Online: Oct. 9, 2021

The Author Email: Wang Jianying (xjuwangjy2019@mail.dlut.edu.cn), Yin Hongxi (hxyin@dlut.edu.cn)

DOI:10.3788/AOS202141.1901002

Topics

laser devices and laser physics

Lasers and Laser Optics

Laser physics

laser manufacturing

Instrumentation, Measurement and Metrology

Table 1. System simulation parameters

Table 1. System simulation parameters

Table 2. Absorption, scattering and attenuation coefficients of the seawater

Table 2. Absorption, scattering and attenuation coefficients of the seawater

Table 3. Minimum ASNR γ¯min required by the system (four rectangular mQAM modulation schemes/five antenna configuration schemes)

Table 3. Minimum ASNR γ¯min required by the system (four rectangular mQAM modulation schemes/five antenna configuration schemes)

Table 4. Minimum transmit power Ps，min in 3×4 MIMO system for different aperture diameters

Table 4. Minimum transmit power Ps，min in 3×4 MIMO system for different aperture diameters

Table 5. Maximum effective link distance Lmax under different transmitter powers Ps

Table 5. Maximum effective link distance Lmax under different transmitter powers Ps

Table 6. Maximum effective link distance Lmax in different water types

Table 6. Maximum effective link distance Lmax in different water types

Table 7. Comparison of γ¯min and Lmax between QAM modulation and BPSK modulation (3×2 MIMO)

Table 7. Comparison of γ¯min and Lmax between QAM modulation and BPSK modulation (3×2 MIMO)

Table 3. Minimum ASNR ${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ required by the system (four rectangular mQAM modulation schemes/five antenna configuration schemes)

Table 3. Minimum ASNR ${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ required by the system (four rectangular mQAM modulation schemes/five antenna configuration schemes)

Table 4. Minimum transmit power P_s，min in 3×4 MIMO system for different aperture diameters

Table 4. Minimum transmit power P_s，min in 3×4 MIMO system for different aperture diameters

Table 5. Maximum effective link distance L_max under different transmitter powers P_s

Table 5. Maximum effective link distance L_max under different transmitter powers P_s

Table 6. Maximum effective link distance L_max in different water types

Table 6. Maximum effective link distance L_max in different water types

Table 7. Comparison of ${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ and L_max between QAM modulation and BPSK modulation (3×2 MIMO)

Table 7. Comparison of ${\bar{γ}}_{min}$ and L_max between QAM modulation and BPSK modulation (3×2 MIMO)