Analysis of Wireless Seismic Data Acquisition Networks using Markov Chain Models

Traditional seismic data acquisition systems used for surveying during the exploration of oil and gas rely on cables between geophones and data collection center. Despite the fact that cable-based systems provide reliable seismic data transfer, their deployment and maintenance costs increase substantially as the survey area increases in scale. This paper investigates the aggregate data throughput and transmission time from wireless geophones to gateway node in a wireless geophone network architecture based on IEEE802.11af standard. The analytical expressions of throughput and transmission time are derived using Markov chain models. Two Markov models are considered for this purpose: one for modeling carrier sense multiple access method with collision avoidance (CSMA/CA) behavior and the other for representing a buffer in a wireless geophone. Furthermore, the physical layer path-loss models are taken into account.

[1]  Doug Crice,et al.  CABLELESS SEISMIC SYSTEMS FOR NEAR SURFACE GEOPHYSICS , 2015 .

[2]  R. C. Bernhardt.  The effect of path loss models on the simulated performance of portable radio systems , 1989, IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, 1989, and Exhibition. 'Communications Technology for the 1990s and Beyond.

[3]  Shih-Hau Fang,et al.  Fairness analysis of throughput and delay in WLAN environments with channel diversities , 2011, EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw..

[4]  H.T. Friis,et al.  A Note on a Simple Transmission Formula , 1946, Proceedings of the IRE.

[5]  Thad Welch,et al.  Very near ground radio frequency propagation measurements and analysis for military applications , 1999, MILCOM 1999. IEEE Military Communications. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.99CH36341).

[6]  Carlo Fischione,et al.  A generalized Markov chain model for effective analysis of slotted IEEE 802.15.4 , 2009, 2009 IEEE 6th International Conference on Mobile Adhoc and Sensor Systems.

[7]  Luciano Ahumada,et al.  Wireless Access Channels with Near-Ground Level Antennas , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications.

[8]  Bulent Tavli,et al.  Path-Loss Modeling for Wireless Sensor Networks: A review of models and comparative evaluations. , 2017, IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine.

[9]  Matti Latva-aho,et al.  Ultra-wide band sensor networks in oil and gas explorations , 2013, IEEE Communications Magazine.

[10]  D. Smart,et al.  Near-earth RF propagation - Path loss and variation with weather , 2013, 2013 International Conference on Radar.

[11]  Konstantinos Paparrizos,et al.  A-Simple-and-Effective-Delay-Distribution-Analysis-for-IEEE-802.11 , 2006, 2006 IEEE 17th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications.

[12]  Umberto Spagnolini,et al.  Wireless geophone networks for high-density land acquisition Technologies and future potential , 2008 .

[13]  Yi Huang,et al.  Outdoor Signal Strength Measurement at TV Band and ISM Band in Otaniemi Campus , 2013 .

[14]  A. Girotra,et al.  Performance Analysis of the IEEE 802 . 11 Distributed Coordination Function , 2005 .

[15]  Brahim Bensaou,et al.  Performance analysis of IEEE 802.11e contention-based channel access , 2004, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[16]  R. Ellis,et al.  Current cabled and cable-free seismic acquisition systems each have their own advantages and disadvantages – is it possible to combine the two? , 2014 .

[17]  Joan García-Haro,et al.  An accurate radio channel model for wireless sensor networks simulation , 2005, Journal of Communications and Networks.

[18]  Theodore S. Rappaport,et al.  Wireless communications - principles and practice , 1996 .

[19]  Dennis Freed,et al.  Cable-free nodes: The next generation land seismic system , 2008 .

[20]  Fred Daneshgaran,et al.  Unsaturated Throughput Analysis of IEEE 802.11 in Presence of Non Ideal Transmission Channel and Capture Effects , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications.