Filtered-OFDM with channel coding based on T-distribution noise for underwater acoustic communication

  • Mustafa Sami AhmedEmail author
  • Nor Shahida Mohd Shah
  • Fayad Ghawbar
  • Yasir Amer Jawhar
  • Akram A. Almohammedi
Original Research


Bit error rate (BER) is typically high in underwater acoustic (UWA) channel, which is characterized by high propagation delay and poor quality of communications. UWA noise statistics do not follow the standard Gaussian distribution. It has been proven through field tests that the noise follows the t-distribution in Malaysian shallow-water. In this paper, a study on UWA error performance is presented based on t-distribution. Furthermore, the expressions of error performance are derived using binary phase shift keying (BPSK) and quadrature phase shift keying (QPSK) modulations order. Moreover, the new waveform filtered orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (F-OFDM) in UWA with turbo and convolution code is adopted. The simulation results show that at BER 10–3, the Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) is 6 dB and 11 dB for BPSK and QPSK, respectively. The turbo code performance appears to be superior over the convolution code. Furthermore, the results indicate that F-OFDM significantly improves the power spectral density to approximately 120 dBW compared with OFDM.


F-OFDM OFDM t-Distribution Gaussian distribution Channel coding Underwater acoustic 



This research was funded by the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia under Fundamental Research Grant Scheme Vot No. K096 and partially sponsored by Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia


  1. Ahsanullah M, Kibria BG, Shakil M (2014) Normal and student's t distributions and their applications, vol 4. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Aboosi YY, Sha'ameri AZ (2017a) Improved signal de-noising in underwater acoustic noise using S-transform: a performance evaluation and comparison with the wavelet transform. J Ocean Eng Sci 2(3):172–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Aboosi YY, Sha'ameri AZ (2017b) Improved underwater signal detection using efficient time–frequency de-noising technique and pre-whitening filter. Appl Acoust 123:93–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Al-Aboosi YY, Ahmed MS, Shah NSM, Khamis NHH (2017a) Study of absorption loss effects on acoustic wave propagation in shallow water using different empirical models. ARPN J Eng Appl Sci 12:6474–6478Google Scholar
  5. Al-Aboosi YY, Kanaa A, Sha'ameri AZ, Abdualnabi HA (2017b) Diurnal variability of underwater acoustic noise characteristics in shallow water. Telkomnika 15(1):314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Almohammedi AA, Noordin NK, Sali A, Hashim F, Balfaqih M (2017) An adaptive multi-channel assignment and coordination scheme for IEEE 802.11 P/1609.4 in vehicular Ad-Hoc networks. IEEE Access 6:2781–2802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Babar Z, Sun Z, Ma L, Qiao G (2016) Shallow water acoustic channel modeling and OFDM simulations. In: Paper presented at the OCEANS 2016 MTS/IEEE MontereyGoogle Scholar
  8. Balfaqih M, Nordin R, Balfaqih Z, Haseeb S, Hashim A (2015) An evaluation of IEEE 802.11 MAC layer handoff process in capwap centralized WLAN. J Theor Appl Inf Technol 71(3):468–479Google Scholar
  9. Balfaqih M, Ismail M, Nordin R, Balfaqih Z (2017) Handover performance evaluation of centralized and distributed network-based mobility management in vehicular urban environment. In: Paper presented at the 2017 9th IEEE-GCC conference and exhibition (GCCCE)Google Scholar
  10. Banerjee S, Agrawal M (2013) Underwater acoustic noise with generalized Gaussian statistics: effects on error performance. In: Paper presented at the OCEANS-Bergen, 2013 MTS/IEEEGoogle Scholar
  11. Banerjee S, Agrawal M (2014) On the performance of underwater communication system in noise with Gaussian mixture statistics. In: Paper presented at the communications (NCC), 2014 twentieth national conference onGoogle Scholar
  12. Bernard S (2001) Digital communications fundamentals and applications. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Berrou C, Glavieux A, Thitimajshima P (1993) Near Shannon limit error-correcting coding and decoding: Turbo-codes. In: Paper presented at the communications, 1993. ICC'93 Geneva. Technical program, conference record, IEEE international conference onGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen P, Rong Y, Nordholm S, He Z, Duncan AJ (2017) Joint channel estimation and impulsive noise mitigation in underwater acoustic OFDM communication systems. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun 16(9):6165–6178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chitre M, Potter J, Heng OS (2004) Underwater acoustic channel characterisation for medium-range shallow water communications. In: Paper presented at the OCEANS'04. MTTS/IEEE TECHNO-OCEAN'04Google Scholar
  16. Chitre M, Ong S, Potter J (2005) Performance of coded OFDM in very shallow water channels and snapping shrimp noise. In: Paper presented at the OCEANS, 2005. Proceedings of MTS/IEEEGoogle Scholar
  17. Wu D, Zhang X, Qiu J, Gu L, Saito Y, Benjebbour A, Kishiyama Y (2016) A field trial of f-OFDM toward 5G. In: IEEE globecom workshops (GC Wkshps), pp 1–6Google Scholar
  18. Gerzaguet R, Bartzoudis N, Baltar LG, Berg V, Doré J-B, Kténas D et al (2017) The 5G candidate waveform race: a comparison of complexity and performance. EURASIP J Wirel Commun Netw 2017(1):13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goalic A, Trubuil J, Beuzelin N (2006) Channel coding for underwater acoustic communication system. In: Paper presented at the OCEANS 2006Google Scholar
  20. Gomathi R, Manickam JML (2016) PAPR reduction technique using combined DCT and LDPC based OFDM system for underwater acoustic communication. ARPN J Eng Appl Sci 11(7):4424–4430Google Scholar
  21. Hammoodi A, Audah L, Taher MA (2019) Green coexistence for 5G waveform candidates: a review. IEEE Access 7:10103–10126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Han W, Huang J, Jiang M (2009) Performance analysis of underwater digital speech communication system based on LDPC codes. In: Paper presented at the industrial electronics and applications, 2009. ICIEA 2009. 4th IEEE Conference onGoogle Scholar
  23. Huang J, Zhou S, Willett P (2008) Nonbinary LDPC coding for multicarrier underwater acoustic communication. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 26(9):1684–1696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Javaid N, Ahmad Z, Sher A, Wadud Z, Khan ZA, Ahmed SH (2019) Fair energy management with void hole avoidance in intelligent heterogeneous underwater WSNs. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 10(11):4225–4241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jawhar YA, Ramli KN, Taher MA, Shah NSM, Audah L, Ahmed MS, Abbas T (2018) New low-complexity segmentation scheme for the partial transmit sequence technique for reducing the high PAPR value in OFDM systems. ETRI J 40(6):699–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jawhar YA, Audah L, Taher MA, Ramli KN, Shah NSM, Musa M, Ahmed MS (2019) A review of partial transmit sequence for PAPR reduction in the OFDM systems. IEEE Access 7:18021–18041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jin L, Li Y, Zhao C, Wei Z, Li B, Shi J (2016) Cascading polar coding and LT coding for radar and sonar networks. EURASIP J Wirel Commun Netw 2016(1):254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Li D, Wu Y, Zhu M (2017) Nonbinary LDPC code for noncoherent underwater acoustic communication under non-Gaussian noise. In: Paper presented at the signal processing, communications and computing (ICSPCC), 2017 IEEE International Conference onGoogle Scholar
  29. Liu L, Wang Y, Li L, Zhang X, Wang J (2009) Design and implementation of channel coding for underwater acoustic system. In: Paper presented at the ASIC, 2009. ASICON'09. IEEE 8th international conference onGoogle Scholar
  30. Liu L, Zhang Y, Zhang P, Zhou L, Niu J (2017) Channel coding for underwater acoustic single-carrier CDMA communication system. In: Paper presented at the seventh international conference on electronics and information engineeringGoogle Scholar
  31. Liu Y, Chen X, Zhong Z, Ai B, Miao D, Zhao Z et al (2017) Waveform design for 5g networks: analysis and comparison. IEEE Access 5:19282–19292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Medwin H, Clay CS (1997) Fundamentals of acoustical oceanography. Academic Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  33. Murugan SS, Natarajan V (2010) Performance analysis of signal to noise ratio and bit error rate for multiuser using passive time reversal technique in underwater communication. In: Paper presented at the 2010 international conference on wireless communication and sensor computing (ICWCSC)Google Scholar
  34. Noguet D, Gautier M, Berg V (2011) Advances in opportunistic radio technologies for TVWS. EURASIP J Wirel Commun Netw 2011(1):170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ochiai H, Imai H (2001) On the distribution of the peak-to-average power ratio in OFDM signals. IEEE Trans Commun 49(2):282–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Panaro J, Lopes F, Barreira LM, Souza FE (2012) Underwater acoustic noise model for shallow water communications. In: Paper presented at the Brazilian telecommunication symposiumGoogle Scholar
  37. Qiao G, Babar Z, Ma L, Liu S, Wu J (2017) MIMO-OFDM underwater acoustic communication systems—a review. Phys Commun 23:56–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Roy S, Duman TM, McDonald V, Proakis JG (2007) High-rate communication for underwater acoustic channels using multiple transmitters and space–time coding: receiver structures and experimental results. IEEE J Oceanic Eng 32(3):663–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schaich F, Wild T (2014) Waveform contenders for 5G—OFDM vs. FBMC vs. UFMC. In: Paper presented at the 2014 6th international symposium on communications, control and signal processing (ISCCSP)Google Scholar
  40. Sha'ameri AZ, Al-Aboosi YY, Khamis NHH (2014) Underwater acoustic noise characteristics of shallow water in tropical seas. In: Paper presented at the computer and communication engineering (ICCCE), 2014 international conference onGoogle Scholar
  41. Shah NSM, Al-Aboosi YY, Ahmed MS (2018) Error performance analysis in underwater acoustic noise with non-Gaussian distribution. Telkomnika 16(2):681–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stojanovic M, Preisig J (2009) Underwater acoustic communication channels: propagation models and statistical characterization. IEEE Commun Mag 47(1):84–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stojanovic M, Catipovic JA, Proakis JG (1994) Phase-coherent digital communications for underwater acoustic channels. IEEE J Oceanic Eng 19(1):100–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tahir B, Schwarz S, Rupp M (2017) BER comparison between convolutional, turbo, LDPC, and polar codes. In: Paper presented at the telecommunications (ICT), 2017 24th international conference onGoogle Scholar
  45. Urick RJ (1984) Ambient noise in the sea. Report No. 20070117128. Undersea Warefare Technology Office, Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang J, Jin A, Shi D, Wang L, Shen H, Wu D et al (2017) Spectral efficiency improvement with 5G technologies: results from field tests. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 35(8):1867–1875Google Scholar
  47. Wu X, Jiang M, Zhao C (2018) Decoding optimization for 5G LDPC codes by machine learning. IEEE Access 6:50179–50186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhang X, Jia M, Chen L, Ma J, Qiu J (2015) Filtered-OFDM-enabler for flexible waveform in the 5th generation cellular networks. In: Paper presented at the global communications conference (GLOBECOM), 2015 IEEEGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departmant of Communication Engineering, Faculty of Electrical and Electronic EngineeringUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn MalaysiaParit RajaMalaysia
  2. 2.Faculty of Engineering TechnologyUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Pagoh Edu HubPagohMalaysia
  3. 3.Department of Computer and Communication EngineeringUniversity Putra MalaysiaSeri KembanganMalaysia

Personalised recommendations