Federal University of Technology, Nigeria
* Corresponding author
Federal University of Technology, Nigeria
Federal University of Technology, Nigeria

Article Main Content

In wireless optical communication systems, the transmission of optical signals via the channel (air or water) is affected by absorption and scattering. These reduce the signal strength (attenuation) and transmission distance of the signals. In pure water, the blue-green region of the visible light gives low attenuation. Some models have been developed to characterize the underwater optical channel such as Beer Lambert’s law, Radiative Transfer equation and Monte Carlo model. In underwater optical communication, optical power meters are an invaluable tool in the determination of attenuation coefficients. However, optical power meters for underwater optical communication are very expensive. There is a need to be able to determine the attenuation in the underwater optical communication channel at a low cost, especially in the absence of underwater optical power meters. In this paper, we present an alternative low-cost experimental method of obtaining the approximate attenuation coefficient of the visible light beam in underwater optical wireless communication without the use of optical power meters. A wireless visible light communication system was set up experimentally for underwater measurements involving an oscilloscope as the only measuring device. The system uses sub-carrier frequency modulation; a white light-emitting diode array for the transmitter, and a solar panel at the receiver front end. A theoretical transmission model was developed from the experimental setup based on the line of sight method in an unbounded medium, Beer Lambert’s law, and the received sub-carrier signals; in order to provide an alternative method of determining approximately the attenuation coefficient of the underwater medium. Experiments were performed in air, clear water and in saline water. The attenuation in the air was used as a reference upon which attenuation in the clear water and the saline water was based. The saline water has a salt concentration of 6.7 g/100 mL by weight and a total dissolved solid of 86.2 ppt. The trend of the measured received sub-carrier signals showed deviation from the developed theoretical model, and the model was therefore adjusted to conform to the experimental results. From the adjusted model, the attenuation coefficient of 0.0007379 cm-1 and 0.02447 cm-1 were obtained for clear water and the saline water respectively. The method is simple, straightforward, easy to set up in a laboratory, low cost and can be applied to visible light of any wavelength.

References

  1. Shen C, Guo Y, Oubei HM, Ng TK, Liu G, Park K, Ho K, Alouini M, Ooi BS. 20 meter underwater wireless optical communication link with 1.5 Gbps data rate. Optical Society of America, 2016;24(22):25502?25509.
     Google Scholar
  2. Kaushal H, Kaddoum G. Underwater optical wireless communication. IEEE Access, 2016;4: 518?1547.
     Google Scholar
  3. Matthew L, Singh YP, Sharma S. An extensive study on under-water communication using led /laser enabled li-fi modules. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science Engineering and Technology, 2016;5(11):19435?19440.
     Google Scholar
  4. Oubei HM, Li C, Park K, Ng TK, Alouini M, Ooi BS. 2.3 Gbit/s underwater wireless optical communications using directly modulated 520nm laser diode. Optics Express, 2015; 23(16): 20743-20748.
     Google Scholar
  5. Elamassie M, Miramirkhani F, Uysal M. Channel modeling and performance characterization of underwater visible light communications. IEEE International Conference on Communication Workshops, pp. 1?5, 2018.
     Google Scholar
  6. Duntley S. Light in the sea, Optical Society of America, 1963; 53: 214?233.
     Google Scholar
  7. Rottgers R, Doerffer R, McKee D, Schonfeld W. Pure water spectral absorption, scattering, and real part of refractive index model, University of Strathclyde Glasgow, Algorithm Technical Basis Document, 2010, pp. 1?18.
     Google Scholar
  8. Ojediran OA, Ponnle AA, Oyetunji SA. Experimental study on transmission of visible light in table salt water and effect on underwater wireless optical communication. European Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EJECE), 2022;6(2):25?32.
     Google Scholar
  9. Jasman F, Green JR. Monte Carlo simulation for underwater wireless communications. International Workshop on Optical Wireless Communications, pp. 113?117, 2013.
     Google Scholar
  10. Zeng Z, Zhang H, Dong Y, Cheng J. A survey of underwater wireless optical communication. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 2016;19(1):1?62.
     Google Scholar
  11. Li C, Lu H, Tsai W, Wang Z, Hung C, Su C, Lu Y. A 5 m/25 Gbps underwater wireless optical communication system. IEEE Photonics Journal, 2018;10(3):1?10.
     Google Scholar
  12. Majlesein B, Gholami A, Ghassemlooy Z. A complete model for underwater optical wireless communication systems. 11th International Symposium on Communication Systems, Networks and Digital Signal Processing (CSNDSP), pp. 1?5, 2018.
     Google Scholar
  13. Miramirkhani F, Uysal M. Visible light communication channel modeling for underwater environments with blocking and shadowing. IEEE Access, 2018; 6: 1082-1090.
     Google Scholar
  14. Li D, Chen C, Liaw S, Afifah S, Sung J, Yeh C. Performance evaluation of underwater wireless optical communication system by varying the environmental parameters. Photonics, 2021;8(3):1?12.
     Google Scholar
  15. Cai R, Zhang M, Dai D, Shi Y, Gao S. Analysis of the underwater wireless optical communication channel based on a comprehensive multiparameter model. Applied Sciences, 2021;11(13):6051?6065.
     Google Scholar
  16. L. E. Estes. Imaging optical beam attenuation coefficient meter. US Patent 9816859 B1, November 14, 2017.
     Google Scholar
  17. L. E. Estes. Method for measuring optical attenuation in a liquid medium. US Patent 9983055 B1, May 29. 2018.
     Google Scholar
  18. Lin H, Zhang X, Ma L, Hu Q, Jin D. Estimation of water attenuation coefficient by imaging modeling of the backscattered light with the pulsed laser range-gated imaging system. Optics Continuum, 2022;1(5):989?1002.
     Google Scholar
  19. Techopedia Inc. Optical Power Meter. What does optical power meter mean? [Internet]. 2022 [updated 2011 October 17; cited 2022]. Available from https://www.techopedia.com/definition/24945/optical-power-meter-opm
     Google Scholar
  20. Gabriel C, Khalighi M, Bourennane S, Leon P, Rigaud V. Monte-Carlo-Based channel characterization for underwater optical communication systems. Optical Communication Networks, 2013;5(1):1?12.
     Google Scholar