Abstract

In general, the use of angle-diversity receivers makes it possible to reduce the impact of ambient light noise, path loss and multipath distortion, in part by exploiting the fact that they often receive the desired signal from different directions. Angle-diversity detection can be performed using a composite receiver with multiple detector elements looking in different directions. These are called non-imaging angle-diversity receivers. In this paper, a comparison of three non-imaging angle-diversity receivers as input sensors of nodes for an indoor infrared (IR) wireless sensor network is presented. The receivers considered are the conventional angle-diversity receiver (CDR), the sectored angle-diversity receiver (SDR), and the self-orienting receiver (SOR), which have been proposed or studied by research groups in Spain. To this end, the effective signal-collection area of the three receivers is modelled and a Monte-Carlo-based ray-tracing algorithm is implemented which allows us to investigate the effect on the signal to noise ratio and main IR channel parameters, such as path loss and rms delay spread, of using the three receivers in conjunction with different combination techniques in IR links operating at low bit rates. Based on the results of the simulations, we show that the use of a conventional angle-diversity receiver in conjunction with the equal-gain combining technique provides the solution with the best signal to noise ratio, the lowest computational capacity and the lowest transmitted power requirements, which comprise the main limitations for sensor nodes in an indoor infrared wireless sensor network.

Highlights

  • Most wireless sensor networks used are currently based on radio frequency (RF)systems [1,2], wireless optical communications are becoming an alternative to RF technology in some well-defined indoor application scenarios, such as environments where RF emissions are forbidden or restricted, video/audio transmission for in-home applications, secure network access or sensor networking [3]

  • We study by simulation those indoor IR links that are characterised by the use of three non-imaging angle-diversity receivers as input sensor of nodes for an indoor IR wireless sensor network

  • Simulations are used to compare the performance of the three non-imaging angle-diversity receivers described in the previous section and shown in Figure 3: the conventional angle-diversity receiver (CDR), the sectored angle-diversity receiver (SDR), and the self-orienting receiver (SOR)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Most wireless sensor networks used are currently based on radio frequency (RF). We study by simulation those indoor IR links that are characterised by the use of three non-imaging angle-diversity receivers as input sensor of nodes for an indoor IR wireless sensor network. We compare the use of SDR, CDR, and SOR as the input sensor for the nodes in an indoor IR wireless sensor network operating in a diffusive link for broadcast communication This comparison is based on calculating the rms delay spread, the path loss, and the SNR when MRC, EGC, and SB combination techniques are employed. The use of angle-diversity receivers can be combined with multi-beam transmitters to significantly improve the power efficiency of diffuse links [4,10,22], which is desirable due to the power constraint of sensor nodes This is an area for consideration in future research.

Channel Model and Signal-to-Noise Ratio
Channel Impulse Response
Conventional Angle-Diversity Receiver
Sectored Angle-Diversity Receiver
Self-Orienting Receiver
Signal to Noise Ratio
Signal to Noise Ratio for Angle-Diversity Receivers
Simulation Results and Discussion
Results andand
Theitresults
Path loss receiver the conventional

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.