Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interference-Free Source Deployment for Coverage in Underwater Acoustic Backscatter Networks

  • Published:
Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Coverage in an underwater acoustic sensor network is directly related to successful sensing and communication among battery-powered nodes with strictly limited lifetime. It is impractical to change or recharge batteries in most of the underwater applications. Moreover, major power consumption of the sensor nodes occur during acoustic transmission. In this regard, acoustic backscatter networking emerges as a promising communication technique, where nodes transmit data by modulating and reflecting a fraction of an incident carrier signal from an acoustic source, which removes the lifetime limitation due to depletion of batteries. In this study, we introduce and analyze the feasibility of Underwater Acoustic Backscatter Networks (UABN). We derive equations for the rectified voltage and harvested power at a UABN node. We investigate the communication range by calculating the maximum distance at which UABN nodes can be powered using practical transducer assumptions and viable transmission power levels. Communication coverage, which is a measure of successful data collection from all nodes in the event field, determines the performance of UABN. We analytically study interference-free source deployment for UABN coverage in terms of source power, range, transmission frequency, network size, and node characteristics. Numerical examples demonstrate that UABN operation is realizable with a feasible number of sources. An event field of size 0.04 km\(^2\) can be covered with a single directional source transmitting with 1000 W at 5 kHz. As long as the transmission frequency does not exceed 100 kHz, only 5 sources are sufficient for interference-free coverage using transmission power levels below 500 W.

Graphical Abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Akyildiz IF, Pompili D, Melodia T (2005) Underwater acoustic sensor networks: Research challenges. Ad Hoc Netw 3(3):257–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2005.01.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Heidemann J, Stojanovic M, Zorzi M (2012) Underwater sensor networks: Applications, advances and challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 370(1958):158–175. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2011.0214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ali M, Jayakody DNK, Chursin YA et al (2020) Recent advances and future directions on underwater wireless communications. Arch Comput Meth Eng 27:1379–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-019-09354-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Boukerche A, Sun P (2020) Design of algorithms and protocols for underwater acoustic wireless sensor networks. ACM Comput Surv (CSUR) 53(6):1–34. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3421763

  5. Caiti A, Crisostomi E, Munafo A (2009) Physical characterization of acoustic communication channel properties in underwater mobile sensor networks. In: Hailes S, Sicari S, Roussos G (eds) Sensor Systems and Software. S-CUBE 2009. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, vol 24. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-11528-8_9

  6. Nayyar A, Puri V, Le DN (2019) Comprehensive Analysis of Routing Protocols Surrounding Underwater Sensor Networks (UWSNs). In: Balas V, Sharma N, Chakrabarti A (eds) Data Management, Analytics and Innovation. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 808. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1402-5_33

  7. Nayyar A, Balas VE (2019) Analysis of Simulation Tools for Underwater Sensor Networks (UWSNs). In: Bhattacharyya S, Hassanien A, Gupta D, Khanna A, Pan I (eds) International Conference on Innovative Computing and Communications. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 55. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2324-9_17

  8. Pompili D, Akyildiz IF (2009) Overview of networking protocols for underwater wireless communications. IEEE Commun Mag 47(1):97–102. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2009.4752684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Goyal N, Dave M, Verma AK (2019) Protocol stack of underwater wireless sensor network: classical approaches and new trends. Wireless Pers Commun 104:995–1022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-018-6064-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bereketli A, Bilgen S (2012) Remotely powered underwater acoustic sensor networks. IEEE Sens J 12(12):3467–3472. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2012.2210401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bereketli A, Turken H, Bilgen S (2013) Cross layer power adaptive CSMA/CA for sink powered underwater acoustic sensor networks. In: 12th Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop (MED-HOC-NET), Ajaccio, France, 26–33. https://doi.org/10.1109/MedHocNet.2013.6767406

  12. Khan A et al (2019) Energy harvesting based routing protocol for underwater sensor networks. PLoS One 14(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219459

  13. Guida R et al (2020) Underwater ultrasonic wireless power transfer: A battery-less platform for the internet of underwater things. IEEE Trans Mob Comput. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMC.2020.3029679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Guida R et al (2018) An acoustically powered battery-less internet of underwater things platform. In: Fourth Underwater Communications and Networking Conference (UComms ’18), Lerici, Italy, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/UComms.2018.8493229

  15. Erdem HE, Yildiz HU, Gungor VC (2019) On the lifetime of compressive sensing based energy harvesting in underwater sensor networks. IEEE Sens J 19(12):4680–4687. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2019.2900427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Erdem HE, Gungor VC (2020) Analyzing lifetime of energy harvesting underwater wireless sensor nodes. Int J Commun Syst 33(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/dac.4214

  17. Basagni S et al (2018) Harnessing HyDRO: Harvesting-aware data routing for underwater wireless sensor networks. In: Eighteenth ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing (Mobihoc ’18), Los Angeles, CA, USA, 271–279. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209582.3209610

  18. Song K, Ji B, Li C (2019) Resource allocation for relay-aided underwater acoustic sensor networks with energy harvesting. Physical Communication 33(12):241–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phycom.2019.01.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Han M et al (2020) Enabling sustainable underwater IoT networks with energy harvesting: A decentralized reinforcement learning approach. IEEE Internet of Things Journal 7(10):9953–9964. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2020.2990733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jang J, Adib F (2019) Underwater backscatter networking. In: ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication (SIGCOMM’19), New York, NY, USA, 187–199. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341302.3342091

  21. Afzal, S. S.: Battery-free subsea internet of things. XRDS, 27(2), 62–65 (2020). doi: 10.1145/3436203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ghaffarivardavagh R et al (2020) Ultra-wideband underwater backscatter via piezoelectric metamaterials. In: Annual conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication on the applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communication (SIGCOMM’20), New York, NY, USA, 722–734. https://doi.org/10.1145/3387514.3405898

  23. Afzal SS et al (2020) Enabling higher-order modulation for underwater backscatter communication. In: Global Oceans, Singapore – U.S. Gulf Coast, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEECONF38699.2020.9389061

  24. Ghaffarivardavagh R et al (2020) Underwater backscatter localization: Toward a battery-free underwater GPS. In: 19th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNets ’20), New York, NY, USA, 125–131. https://doi.org/10.1145/3422604.3425950

  25. Hu G et al (2021) Sparse reconstruction based channel estimation for underwater piezo-acoustic backscatter systems. In: IEEE 93rd Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2021-Spring), Helsinki, Finland, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/VTC2021-Spring51267.2021.9449012

  26. Sherman CH, Butler JL (2007) Electroacoustic transduction. In: Goodman RR, Bucker HP, Dyer I, Simmen JA (eds.) Transducers and Arrays for Underwater Sound, pp. 31–75. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-33139-3

  27. Stojanovic M (2007) On the relationship between capacity and distance in an underwater acoustic communication channel. ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review 11(4):34–43. https://doi.org/10.1145/1347364.1347373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Fisher FH, Simmons VP (1977) Sound absorption in sea water. J Acoust Soc Am 62(3):558–564. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.381574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kurt P et al (2019) Vibro-acoustic design, manufacturing and characterization of a tonpilz-type transducer. Appl Acoust 150:27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apacoust.2019.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ottman GK et al (2002) Adaptive piezoelectric energy harvesting circuit for wireless remote power supply. IEEE Trans Power Electron 17(5):669–676. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2002.802194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Tabesh A, Frechette LG (2010) A low-power stand-alone adaptive circuit for harvesting energy from a piezoelectric micropower generator. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 57(3), 840–849. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2009.2037648

  32. Katsnelson B, Petnikov V, Lynch J (2012) Models and statistics of intensity fluctuations. In: Simmen JA, Bucker HP, Dyer I, Jensen FB, Livingston ES (eds.) Fundamentals of Shallow Water Acoustics, pp. 230–237. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9777-7

  33. Emokpae LE, Younis M (2012) Throughput analysis for shallow water communication utilizing directional antennas. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 30(5):1006–1018. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSAC.2012.120615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Massa TR-1075 Transducers. Massa Products Corp. http://www.massa.com/industrial/oceanographic. Accessed 30 Nov 2021

  35. Urick RJ (1983) Properties of transducer arrays: Directivity index. In: D. Heiberg, J. Davis (eds.) Principles of Underwater Sound, pp. 31–70. McGraw-Hill

  36. Han X et al (2008) Deploying directional sensor networks with guaranteed connectivity and coverage. In: 5th Annual IEEE Communications Society Conference on Sensor, Mesh and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks, San Francisco, CA, USA, 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1109/SAHCN.2008.28

  37. Kuperberg W (1989) Covering the plane with congruent copies of a convex body. Bull Lond Math Soc 21(1):82–86. https://doi.org/10.1112/blms/21.1.82

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Wu W et al (2020) Coverage with connectivity. In: Pardalos PM, Thai MT (eds.) Optimal Coverage in Wireless Sensor Networks, pp. 154–155. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52824-9_9

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors are thankful to the anonymous reviewers, the editor-in-chief Prof. Xuemin Shen, and Ms. Nuray Özer Bereketli from the Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering at Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, for their valuable recommendations to improve the quality, correctness, presentation and readability of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Communication and Information Technologies Division, ASELSAN Inc., Ankara, Turkey

    Alper Bereketli

Authors
  1. Alper Bereketli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alper Bereketli.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Appendix

Appendix

To facilitate the readability of the figures, tables of data values for each figure are given in this section (see Tables 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12).

Table 4 Data Values for \(V_{rect}\) (V) in Fig. 2
Full size table
Table 5 Data Values for \(P_h\) (W) in Fig. 3
Full size table
Table 6 Data Values for SNR (dB) in Fig. 4
Full size table
Table 7 Data Values for \(P_{req}\) (W) in Fig. 5
Full size table
Table 8 Data Values for \(R_s\) (m) in Fig. 8
Full size table
Table 9 Data Values for \(R_s\) (m) in Fig. 9
Full size table
Table 10 Data Values for \(N_{sources}\) in Fig. 11
Full size table
Table 11 Data Values for \(N_{sources}\) in Fig. 12
Full size table
Table 12 Data Values for \(P_t\) (W) in Fig. 13
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bereketli, A. Interference-Free Source Deployment for Coverage in Underwater Acoustic Backscatter Networks. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 15, 1577–1594 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-022-01312-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-022-01312-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation