A Study of Spatial Processing Gain in Underwater Acoustic Communications

Spatial processing, including beamforming and diversity combining, is widely used in communications to mitigate intersymbol interference (ISI) and signal fading caused by multipath propagation. Beamforming suppresses ISI (and noise) by eliminating multipath (and noise) arrivals outside the signal beam. Beamforming requires the signals to be highly coherent between the receivers. Diversity combining combats ISI as well as signal fading by taking advantage of the independent information in the signal. Classical (spatial) diversity requires that signals are independently fading, hence are (spatially) uncorrelated with each other. In the real world, the received signals are neither totally coherent nor totally uncorrelated. The available diversity is complex and not well understood. In this paper, we study the spatial processing gain (SPG) as a function of the number of receivers used, receiver separation, and array aperture based on experimental data, using beamforming and multichannel combining algorithms. We find that the output symbol signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for a multichannel equalizer is predominantly determined by the array aperture divided by the signal coherence length, with a negligible dependence on the number of receivers used. For a given number of receivers, an optimal output symbol SNR (OSNR) is achieved by spacing the receivers equal to or greater than the signal coherence length. We model the SPG in decibels as the sum of the noise suppression gain (NSG, equivalent to signal-to-noise enhancement) and the ISI suppression gain (ISG, equivalent to signal-to-ISI enhancement) both expressed in decibels; the latter exploits the spatial diversity and forms the basis for the diversity gain. Data are interpreted using the modeled result as a guide. We discuss a beam-domain processor for sonar arrays, which yields an improved performance at low-input SNR compared to the element-domain processor because of the SNR enhancement from beamforming many sensors.

[1]  John G. Proakis,et al.  Digital Communications , 1983 .

[2]  J. Proakis,et al.  Adaptive multichannel combining and equalization for underwater acoustic communications , 1993 .

[3]  J. A. Catipovic,et al.  Reduced-complexity simultaneous beamforming and equalization for underwater acoustic communications , 1993, Proceedings of OCEANS '93.

[4]  D. Dowling.  Acoustic pulse compression using passive phase‐conjugate processing , 1994 .

[5]  James A. Ritcey,et al.  Spatial diversity equalization applied to underwater communications , 1994 .

[6]  D. Billon,et al.  Performance of high data rate acoustic underwater communication systems using adaptive beamforming and equalizing , 1994, Proceedings of OCEANS'94.

[7]  A. E. Adams,et al.  Sub-sea acoustic remote communications utilising an adaptive receiving beamformer for multipath suppression , 1994, Proceedings of OCEANS'94.

[8]  Jeffrey A. Neasham,et al.  Performance of coherent PSK receivers using adaptive combining, beamforming and equalisation in 50 km underwater acoustic channels , 1996, OCEANS 96 MTS/IEEE Conference Proceedings. The Coastal Ocean - Prospects for the 21st Century.

[9]  B.S. Sharif,et al.  Combined equalisation and beamforming to achieve 20 kbits/s acoustic telemetry for ROVs , 1996, OCEANS 96 MTS/IEEE Conference Proceedings. The Coastal Ocean - Prospects for the 21st Century.

[10]  William M. Carey,et al.  The determination of signal coherence length based on signal coherence and gain measurements in deep and shallow water , 1997, Oceans '97. MTS/IEEE Conference Proceedings.

[11]  J. Labat,et al.  Test of an high data rate acoustic link in shallow water , 1998, IEEE Oceanic Engineering Society. OCEANS'98. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.98CH36259).

[12]  A.B. Baggeroer,et al.  The state of the art in underwater acoustic telemetry , 2000, IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering.

[13]  T. C. Yang,et al.  Low frequency phase coherent communications in the Sicily Strait , 2000, OCEANS 2000 MTS/IEEE Conference and Exhibition. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.00CH37158).

[14]  P.-P.J. Beaujean,et al.  Spatio-temporal processing of coherent acoustic communication data in shallow water , 2000, IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering.

[15]  Peter L. Nielsen,et al.  Combination of Acoustics with High Resolution Oceanography , 2002 .

[16]  P. Nielsen,et al.  Source Localization in A Highly Variable Shallow Water Environment: Results from Ascot-01 , 2002 .

[17]  Broadband Acoustic Signal Variability in Two “Typical“ Shallow-Water Regions , 2002 .

[18]  T. C. Yang.  Temporal fluctuations of broadband channel impulse functions and underwater acoustic communications at 2-5 kHz/sup 1/ , 2002, OCEANS '02 MTS/IEEE.

[19]  T. C. Yang.  Temporal resolutions of time-reversal and passive-phase conjugation for underwater acoustic communications , 2003 .

[20]  T.C. Yang,et al.  Differences between passive-phase conjugation and decision-feedback equalizer for underwater acoustic communications , 2004, IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering.

[21]  J. Nishiguchi,et al.  Measurements of spatial coherence of recombination X-ray laser , 2004 .

[22]  P.-P.J. Beaujean,et al.  Adaptive array processing for high-speed acoustic communication in shallow water , 2004, IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering.

[23]  T.C. Yang.  Measurements of spatial coherence, beamforming gain and diversity gain for underwater acoustic communications , 2005, Proceedings of OCEANS 2005 MTS/IEEE.

[24]  M. Stojanovic.  Retrofocusing techniques for high rate acoustic communications , 2005 .

[25]  T. C. Yang.  Environmental Effects On Phase Coherent Underwater Acoustic Communications: A Perspective From Several Experimental Measurements , 2005 .

[26]  T. C. Yang.  Measurements of temporal coherence of sound transmissions through shallow water , 2006 .

[27]  Aaas News,et al.  Book Reviews , 1893, Buffalo Medical and Surgical Journal.