Author Affiliations
1Hubei Normal University, Huangshi 435002, China2School of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China3Wuhan Marine Communication Institute, Wuhan 430205, China4Electronic Information School, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China5Wuhan Liubo Photoelectric Technology Co. LTD, Wuhan 430000, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Overall structure diagram of the system
Fig. 2. LED digital modulation characteristic curve
Fig. 3. Improved circuit model diagram
Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of high-power LED signal modulation circuit
Fig. 5. Measured value of the current flow through the LED
Fig. 6. 5 MHz waveform of APD receiving communication bandwidth
Fig. 7. Schematic diagram of the receiving end of the system
Fig. 8. APD detector 45 MHz test output signal
Fig. 9. PMT detector 45 MHz test output signal
Fig. 10. FPGA control core block diagram
Fig. 11. FPGA control unit encoding and decoding data flow
Fig. 12. Underwater optical communication link model
Fig. 13. Engineering prototype
Fig. 14. Underwater experiment test scenario
Fig. 15. Simulating underwater test experiment
Fig. 16. Bit error rate performance test of equipment
Fig. 17. Upper computer display transceiver data diagram
Parameter | TRAD_OOK | IMP_OOK | Average optical power | ${ {P }_{ {\rm{MAX} } } }/2$ | $({ {P }_{ {\rm{BIAS} } } } + { {P }_{ {\rm{MAX} } } })/2$ | Bandwidth requirements | R | R | Channel capacity | $1/{\rm{\tau}} $ | $1/{\rm{\tau}} $ | Slot error rate | $\dfrac{1}{2}\left\{ {1 - {\rm{erf} }\left(\dfrac{ {\sqrt { { {{P} }_{ {\rm{MAX} } } }/2{ {\rm{\sigma} } ^2} } } }{2}\right)} \right\}$ | $\dfrac{1}{2}\left\{ {1 - {\rm{erf} }\left(\dfrac{ {\sqrt {({ { {P} }_{ {\rm{BIAS} } } } + { { {P} }_{ {\rm{MAX} } } })/(2{ {\rm{\sigma} } ^2)} } } }{2}\right)} \right\}$ |
|
Table 1. Comparison table of performance parameters between traditional OOK modulation mode and improved OOK modulation mode
Parameter | Value | LED beam divergent half angle
${\rm{\gamma}} $/(°)
| 3.04 | LD beam divergent half angle
${\rm{\gamma}} $/ (°)
| 0.51 | LED optical transmitting power
${{P}_{\rm{T}}}$/ dBm
| 35.6 | LD optical transmitting power
${{P}_{\rm{T}}}$/ dBm
| 18 | Transmission link off-axis angle
${\rm{\theta }}$/ (°)
| 0 | APD receiving area of photodetector
${ {S }_{\rm{R} } }$/
${\rm{m}}{{\rm{m}}^2}$ | 19.6π | PMT receiving area of photodetector
${ {S }_{\rm{R} } }$/
${\rm{m}}{{\rm{m}}^2}$ | 156.25π | Optical wavelength
${\lambda }$/nm
| 470 |
|
Table 2. Wireless optical transmission characteristic parameters of underwater equipment
Emission source | Communication
distance/m
| Communication
rate/Mbps
| Receiving
detector
| Theoretical received optical
power value/dBm
| Actual received
optical power/dBm
| LD | 5 | 60 | APD | −10.09 | −11.3 | LD | 10 | 60 | APD | −18.73 | −18.5 | LD | 12 | 42 | APD | −21.35 | −20.9 | LED | 20 | 18 | APD | −27.72 | −28.2 | LED | 45 | 15 | PMT | −38.77 | −38.6 | LED | 60 | 10 | PMT | −49.09 | −53.2 |
|
Table 3. Equipment performance parameter test