OE-Performance Analysis of Multipulse Position Modulation Free Space Optical Communication System Under Generalized Atmospheric Turbulence Conditions Including Pointing Errors

Performance analysis of multipulse
position modulation free space

optical communication system under
generalized atmospheric turbulence
conditions including pointing errors
Simbarashe Magidi
Jabeena A. Afthab
Simbarashe Magidi, Jabeena A. Afthab, “Performance analysis of multipulse position modulation

free space optical communication system under generalized atmospheric turbulence conditions
including pointing errors,” Opt. Eng. 59(1), 016107 (2020), doi: 10.1117/1.OE.59.1.016107
Performance analysis of multipulse position
modulation free space optical communication system
under generalized atmospheric turbulence conditions
including pointing errors
Simbarashe Magidi* and Jabeena A. Afthab

Vellore Institute of Technology, School of Electronics Engineering,
Department of Communication Engineering, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
Abstract. The free space optical communication system has become remarkably important
nowadays due to huge benefits associated with it. However, atmospheric induced laser beam
scintillation remains a challenge that has been addressed using different techniques over the
years. Multipulse position modulation has been analyzed over the generalized atmospheric tur-
bulence model (M distribution) using bit error rate (BER), ergodic channel capacity, and outage
probability as performance metric measures. Using Meijer’s G functions closed form expres-
sions for the said performance metrics have been derived. Next, using the derived closed form
expressions, a thorough investigation of how the BER, ergodic channel capacity, and the outage
probability are affected by the atmospheric turbulence conditions and other parameters, such as
operational wavelength, has been carried out. It has been observed that increasing the modu-
lation level cannot significantly reduce the transmitted power required for a targeted BER in
strong atmospheric turbulence channels. Also the outage probability increases with increasing
threshold signal-to-noise ratio. © 2020 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE)
[DOI: 10.1117/1.OE.59.1.016107]
Keywords: free space optics; multipulse position modulation; generalized atmospheric turbu-
lence; bit error rate; outage probability optics.
Paper 191033 received Jul. 26, 2019; accepted for publication Dec. 23, 2019; published online
Jan. 11, 2020.
1 Introduction
The steady increase in the devices and consumers connecting to the wireless networks to access
high-rate data services has demanded overhaul of the networks services. This has seen free space
optical (FSO) communication systems as an alternative means of providing high bandwidth over
short to medium range links.1 Major motivation behind FSO has been the huge license free
bandwidth, high transmission rate, increased security, and low installation as well as mainte-
nance costs, among others.2 Hence, it is rapidly becoming familiar in modern life.3 Key appli-
cations of FSO has been delivering high broadband in metropolitan cities, local area networks,
optical fiber back up, as well as intersatellite and deep space applications.4,5
Unfortunately, the performance of FSO communication is highly affected by adverse atmos-
pheric conditions. Specifically, in clear weather conditions, FSO is heavily affected by atmos-
pheric turbulence, which is a result of the instability in the pressure and air temperature. This
instability is in turn responsible for the variation in the refractive index of the air, leading to laser
beam scintillation.6 Thus to improve the FSO performance, different techniques have been
explored in literature over the years. These include error control coding, diversity techniques,
aperture averaging, adaptive optics, as well as the use of robust modulation techniques among
others.7
Although on off keying (OOK) scheme has been widely researched and applied in commer-
cial FSO, different modulation techniques have been applied with success. These include
*Address all correspondence to Simbarashe Magidi, E-mail: magidisimbarashe37@gmail.com
0091-3286/2020/$28.00 © 2020 SPIE
Optical Engineering 016107-1 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

Magidi and Afthab: Performance analysis of multipulse position modulation free space. . .
differential phase shift keying (DPSK), binary phase shift keying (BPSK), pulse position modu-
lation (PPM), and among others. OOK offers simplicity in design and implementation,8 DPSK
can dissolve scintillation to some extent while pulse modulation has improved power efficiency.9
Specifically, PPM has gained popularity due to lower duty cycle leading to high peak to average
power ratio compared to other PM schemes. The mapping in PPM is such that a block of L bits
are placed into one of the M ¼ 2L time slots. Because of the orthogonality of symbols, the PPM
has a remarkable improvement in bit error rate (BER). Having been concluded that high-energy
efficient PPM schemes require a correspondingly huge bandwidth,10 an alternative multipulse
position modulation (MPPM) has been introduced.11 In this arrangement, more pulses are
located within a symbol of M slots, consequently increasing the throughput without sacrificing
performance.12
Since the atmospheric turbulence and weather induced losses are probabilistic in nature,
several statistical channel models have been proposed to characterize FSO communication with
different modulation schemes.13,14 Some of the attempted and successful approaches include
log normal,15 K,16 and gamma–gamma model.17 However, some few years ago, M-distribution
FSO channel model was proposed.18 This model unifies most of the already proposed statistical
models and is valid for almost all turbulence regimes from weak to strong. Furthermore, it also
takes care of the pointing errors. Thereafter, the performance analysis of different modulation
schemes over Malaga has been analyzed under different conditions such as OOK.19 The BPSK-
SIM over M channel has been analyzed using the error rate as the performance measured in
Ref. 20. DPSK-SIM has been analyzed over the M-turbulence in Ref. 21.
Specifically, studies on MPPM can be mentioned.22,23 MPPM analysis in FSO has been ana-
lyzed, over the gamma–gamma FSO channel.24 Here the 2PPM average symbol error rate closed
form expression has been derived including the pointing error effects. A comparative perfor-
mance analysis of the MPPM and traditional PPM over gamma–gamma including pointing error
effects has been considered.22 An upper bound on the BER of M-ary PPM over log normal and
exponential distributed FSO channel using the APD receiver has been analyzed.25 The major
focus of this study was to deduce the optimum APD gain to result in minimum BER. The effects
of the modulation level on the BER over gamma–gamma channel were considered in Ref. 26.
Moreover, the performance analysis of PPM over log-normal fading channel has been carried
out,27 while the error performance of deep space optical communication with MPPM over coro-
nal turbulence channels has been realized in a more recent study.28
However, in all the aforementioned works, MPPM has never been analyzed over the
generalized M-turbulence FSO channel model. Hence how the average BER is affected by
the modulation order, the operational wavelength and other parameters over the generalized
FSO channel is not available in the literature. Therefore, in this paper, we generalize the
MPPM performance over FSO system. Specifically, we extend the work in Ref. 26, which con-
sidered only the BER over gamma–gamma channel, by deriving novel generalized closed form
analytical expressions for the bit error rate, outage probability, and channel capacity. Hence, the
derived expression can be used for analyzing the MPPM-based FSO system for most of the
already proposed models. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that investigates
the MPPM-based FSO over M channel model. The remainder of this paper is organized as
follows. In Sec. 2, the system model is discussed, which includes the M distribution channel
model and the pointing errors. In Secs. 3, 4, and 5, the performance analysis of MPPM over the
generalized atmospheric turbulence is presented in terms of the average BER, ergodic channel
capacity, and outage probability, respectively. Section 6 presents corresponding numerical results
analysis. Finally, concluding remarks are in Sec. 7.
2 System Model
In this work, we consider an IM/DD FSO communication system, in which the transmitted data
are modulated onto the intensity of the laser beam. The input bits are first mapped into parallel
bits using a serial to parallel converter. The parallel bits are then converted into MPPM symbol
where each symbol is positioned in the different M-time slots. Then the MPPM symbol is used to
modulate the laser beam intensity, which is then subsequently transmitted into the channel using

a transmitting telescope. The transmitting telescope steers the beam width and direction toward
the receiver. At the receiver, a receiving telescope captures the optical signal and passes it into the
photodetector, which performs the optical to electrical conversion. Finally, a low-pass filter con-
ditions the electrical signal by removing unwanted noise. Therefore, the received electrical signal
is given as
X
M −1
M kT
yðtÞ ¼ RPR xðtÞ þ nðtÞ ¼ R PR Ck rect t − þ nðtÞ; (1)
k M
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e001;116;675
k¼0
where
T
1; if 0 ≤ t ≤ M
rectðtÞ ¼ :
0; otherise
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;sec2;116;613
In Eq. (1), PR is the average received optical power, x is the transmitted data, R is the photo-
detector responsivity, and nðtÞ is the additive white Gaussian noise with variance σ 2n . It is also
evident that Ck ¼ 1 for signal time slot and zero for nonsignal time slot. The average received
optical signal can be expressed using the link range equation as29

λ 2
PR ðhÞ ¼ PT ηT ηR GT GR h: (2) EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e002;116;520
4πL
PT is the transmitted optical power, ηT and ηR are the efficiencies of the transmitter and
receiver optics, respectively. GT , GR are the transmitter and receiver telescope gains, respec-
tively. λ is the operating wavelength, L is the transmission length, and h is the channel state
due to atmospheric turbulence. In this work, we assume that the transmitter and receiver tele-
scope gains are equal and hence we have
2
πD
GT ¼ G R ¼ : (3)
λ
D is the diameter of the receiving telescope. The dependency of the transceiver gain on the
squared angular width is evident from Eq. (3) above. Next, we also make the assumption that
ηT ¼ ηR ¼ η and then substitute Eq. (2) into Eq. (3), we get
2
ηAr
PR ðhÞ ¼ PT h: (4)
λL
Ar is the transceiver telescope area given as Ar ¼ πD4 . Equation (4) gives the receiver power
2
at the photodiode.
2.1 Channel Model

The atmospheric turbulence is modeled using the generalized M distribution FSO model. It has
been said that it is valid for all channel conditions from weak to strong and takes care of pointing
errors, which also happens between the transmitter and the receiver. In this model, the optical
beam is considered as consisting of three components: (1) the line of sight component with
power Ω, (2) the scattered component coupled to the line of sight with power 2ρbo, and (3) the
scattered component independent of the previous two components. The third component carries
power of magnitude 2ð1 − ρÞbo. Therefore, the total power of the scattered components is 2bo.
In this representation, the parameter ρ expresses the amount of coupling between the scattered
and line of sight components. The probability distribution of the M distribution FSO turbulence
is given by18
Xβ sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
αþk
−1 αβh
f h ðhÞ ¼ A ak h 2 K α−k 2 ; (5)
γβ þ Ω 0
k¼1

where
βþα
2αα∕2 γβ 2
A¼ α 0 ; (6)
γ 2 ΓðαÞ γβ þ Ω
1þ
and
k k
β−1 ðγβ þ Ω 0 Þ1−2 Ω 0 k−1 α 2
ak ¼ : (7)
k−1 ðk − 1Þ! β
In Eqs. (5) and (6), Γð·Þ is the gamma function and K υ ð·Þ is the modified Bessel function of
second kind and order ν. Also α represents the effective number of large-scale scattering proc-
esses. Hence, it is a positive number; β is a natural number that represents the amount of fading
parameter. For plane waves (used in this study), the scattering parameters can be expressed as
! ! ! !
0.49σ 2R 0.51σ 2R
α ¼ 1∕ exp 12 7
−1 and β ¼ 1∕ exp 12 5
− 1 . σ 2R is the Rytov variance,
6 6
½1þ1.11σ R5 ½1þ0.69σ R5
which is related to the propagation distance L, λ and other parameters as: σ 2R ¼
1.23ð2π∕λÞ7∕6 C2n L11∕6 . C2n is the refractive index structure, which varies from 10−13 m−2∕3
for strong turbulence to 10−17 m−2∕3 for weak turbulence. However, 10−15 m−2∕3 is defined
as a typical average value.16 Moreover in real situation, σ 2R < 0.3, 0.3 ≤ σ 2R < 5, and σ 2R ≥ 5 cor-
responds to the weak, moderate, and strong turbulence regimes, respectively.30,31 Based on this,
different authors in the literature have used the scattering parameter to specify the atmospheric
turbulence strength, which has also been adopted in this study.
For ffisimplicity, we have denoted γ ¼ 2ð1 − ρÞbo . Further, Ω 0 ¼ Ω þ 2ρbo þ
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 2bo Ωρ cosðϕA − ϕB Þ is the average power of the coherent distribution. ϕA and ϕB are the
deterministic phases of the LOS and coupled to LOS components, respectively.
2.2 Pointing Errors

Pointing errors arise due to misalignment between the transmitter and the receiver. Hence, its
consideration is crucial for the determination of the FSO link performance. Pointing errors are
hereby denoted by hp, and its PDF is expressed as32
g2
ðhp Þg
2 −1
f hp ¼ ; 0 ≤ hp ≤ Ao : (8)
Ago
pffiffi
In Eq. (8), Ao ¼ ½erfðνÞ2 is the fraction of the collected optical power. ν ¼ π2 ωaz , in which a
denotes the receiver telescope radius, and ωz is the laser beam width at a distance L.
hpffiffi i
2 1 ω
Furthermore, the equivalent beam width is given as ωzeq ¼ π erfðνÞω −ν 2
z 2
. Finally, g ¼ 2σzeqs is the
2νe
ratio between the effective beam width and the jitter standard deviation σ s .
2.3 Combined Channel Fading Model

If I l represents the signal in the atmosphere, then
I l ¼ e−σL ;
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e009;116;193 (9)
where σ is the attenuation coefficient through propagation length L. Therefore, to account for the
pointing errors and weather induced losses, the following derivation is done. The PDF of I can be
calculated as

Z
f h ðhÞ ¼
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e011;116;735 f hjha ðhjha Þf ha ðha Þdha ; (10)
where f hjha ðhjha Þ is the conditional probability expressed as

2
1 I g2 I g −1
f hjha ðhjha Þ ¼ f ¼ g2 0 ≤ I ≤ Ao ha I l : (11)
ha I l I p ha I i Ao h a I l h a I i
Thus the PDF of I can be simplified as
X β Z∞ sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
g2 A g2 −1 αþk αβha
f h ðhÞ ¼ 2 −1−g
2 h ak h × K α−k 2
2
dh: (12)
ðAo I l Þ g γβ þ Ω 0
k¼1 h
Ao I l
The Bessel function can be expressed as a Meijer’s G function.33 After simple manipulations,
the final expression for the M channel with pointing errors can be expressed as
αþk
g2 A X
β
1 2 3;0 h 1 þ g2
f h ðhÞ ¼ a G1;3 ; (13)
2h k¼1 k B BAo I l g2 ; α; k
Gm;n 0
p;q ½· is the Meijer’s G function. Also B ¼ αβ∕ðγβ þ Ω Þ. The CDF of the M channel
34
model can be expressed as
β αþk
g2 A X 1 2 3;1 h 1; 1 þ g2
Fh ðhÞ ¼ a G2;4 : (14)
2 k¼1 k B BAo I l g2 ; α; k; 0
3 Average BER
The conditional BER for M-ary PPM in the absence of turbulence is given as
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
M M log2 M
BERðhÞ ¼ erfc RPR ðhÞ : EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e015;116;370 (15)
4 2σ n
Substituting Eq. (4) into Eq. (15):

2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
M ηAr M log2 M
BERðhÞ ¼ erfc RPT h : (16)
Lλ
4 2σ n
The assumption is that the bit duration is less than the fading coherence time, and hence a
slow fading channel environment. The temporal coherence time of the atmospheric turbulence is
known to be in the order of milliseconds and hence, it is very large compared to the typical data
symbol and the channel can be considered frozen for the duration of more than one MPPM
symbol.9
Therefore, the average BER is obtained by averaging Eq. (16) over the channel PDF as
Z∞
Pe ¼
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e017;116;193 BERðhÞf h ðhÞdh: (17)
o
Then substituting Eqs. (16) and (13) into Eq. (17):

Z∞ 2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi αþk
g2 Ah−1 X
β
M ηAr M log2 M 1 2 3;0 h 1 þ g2
Pe ¼ erfc RPT h × ak G1;3 dh:
Lλ B BAo I l g2 ; α; k
4 2σ n 2 k¼1
0
(18)

After rearranging
αþk Z∞ 2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Mg2 A X
β
1 2 −1 ηAr M log2 M h 1 þ g2
Pe ¼ a h erfc RPT h × G1;3
3;0
dh:
8 k¼1 k B Lλ BAo I l g2 ; α; k
2σ n
0
(19)
The erfcð·Þ can be expressed in terms of the Meijer G functions as: erfcðzÞ ¼
p1ffiffi G2;0 ½z2 j
1
π 1;2
. Therefore, Eq. (19) can be expressed as
0; 1∕2
αþk Z∞ 2 2
Mg2 A X
β
1 2 R PT M log2 M 2 1 h 1 þ g2
Pe ¼ pffiffiffi ak h−1 G2;0 h × G 3;0
dh:
8 π k¼1 B 1;2
4ðλL∕ηAr Þ4 σ 2n 0; 1∕2 1;3
BAo I l g2 ; α; k
0
(20)
Using the identity in Ref. 35, the final expression for the BER can be expressed as
αþk
2α−3 Mg2 A X k
β
1 2 2;6
Pe ¼ p ffiffiffiffiffi 2 ak G7;4
8 π 3
k¼1
B
2 2 1−g2 2−g2 1−α 2−α 1−k 2−k
4R PT M log2 MðBAo I l Þ2 2 2 ; 2 ; 2 ; 2 ; 2 ; 2 ; 1
h : (21)
ðλL∕ηAr Þ4 σ 2n 0; 1 ; − g ; 1−g
2 2
2 2 2
4 Channel Capacity
Ergodic capacity describes the upper limit of data rate under the arbitrary of a small and accept-
able BER. In other words, it is the limiting information rate that can be achieved when the
information is transmitted through a channel without error. For a channel with bandwidth Bw
generally, it is expressed as
CðhÞ ¼ Bw log2 ½1 þ SNRðhÞ:

The value of the channel capacity fluctuates with respect to the varying atmospheric irradi-
ance h. Therefore, we consider the expected value called the ergodic capacity C ¼ E½CðIÞ.
Substituting the SNRðhÞ for MPPM and rearranging, the ergodic channel capacity is given as
αþk Z∞ 4
g2 A X
β
1 2 −1 ηAr M log2 M
C¼ a h Bw log2 1 þ R PT
2 2
2 k¼1 k B λL 2σ 2n
0

h 1 þ g2
× G1;3
3;0
dh: (23)
BAo I l g2 ; α; k
This can be further expressed as
αþk Z∞ 4
Bw Ag2 X
β
1 2 −1 2 2 ηAr M log2 M h 1 þ g2
C¼ a h In R PT × G1;3
3;0
dh:
2In2 k¼1 k B λL 2σ 2n BAo I l g2 ; α; k
0
(24)

The natural logarithmic function in Eq. (24) can be expressed in the form of Meijers G func-

1;1
tion [Eq. 01.04.26.0003.01 in Ref. 36] as Inð1 þ xÞ ¼ G2;2 xj
1;2
. Therefore, Eq. (24) can be
1;0
expressed as
αþk Z∞ 4
Bw Ag2 X
β
1 2 2 2 ηAr M log2 M 1;1
C¼ ak h−1 G1;2 R P
2In2 k¼1 B 2;2 T
λL 2σ 2n 1;0
0

h 1 þ g2
× G3;0 dh: (25)
1;3
BAo I l g2 ; α; k
Finally, the integration of Meijer’s G functions can be performed using the identity in Ref. 35
so that the ergodic channel capacity for MPPM over generalized atmospheric turbulence channel
can be solved in closed form as
αþk
2αþk−4 ABw g2 X
β
1 2
C¼ ak
πIn2 k¼1
B
4 1−g2 2−g2 1−α 2−α 1−k 2−k
2 2 2 ηAr M log2 M 1;1; 2 ; 2 ; 2 ; 2 ; 2 ; 2
× G8;4 8ðBAo I l Þ R PT
1;8
: (26)
λL σ 2n 1; − g ; 1−g ; 0
2 2
2 2
5 Outage Probability
The outage probability refers to the condition where the endwise output SNR falls less than a
specified threshold.33 The threshold SNR is that value of SNR above which the quality of service
is acceptable. Otherwise, the quality of service in unacceptable. Over a fading channel, the
outage probability can be expressed as
Pout ¼ P½SNRðhÞ ≤ SNRth :

For MPPM,
2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 4
ηAr M log2 M λL SNRth
Pout ¼ P RPT h ≤ SNRth ¼ P h ≤ 2σ 2n : (28)
Lλ ηAr R2 P2T M log2 M
2σ n
Finally
4
2 λL SNRth
Pout ¼ Fh 2σ n : (29)
ηAr R2 P2T M log2 M
In Eq. (29), Fh ð·Þ is the CDF of the channel model. For the M turbulence channel model, the
CDF is given as in Eq. (14). By combining Eqs. (14) and (28), the outage probability of the
MPPM FSO system over the generalized atmospheric turbulence channel can be expressed as
αþk 4
Ag2 X
β 1;1 þ g2
1 2 3;1 2σ 2n λL SNRth
Pout ¼ ak G2;4 : (30)
B BAo I l ηAr R2 P2T M log2 M g2 ; α; k; 0
2 k¼1
Based on the literature survey and using the available resources and to the best of the authors’
knowledge, the expressions derived in this section for average BER [Eq. (20)], ergodic channel
capacity [Eq. (25)], and outage probability [Eq. (29)], for analysis of MPPM over the generalized
atmospheric turbulence channel are unique and genuine for the performance analysis of FSO
systems.

6 Results and Discussions

In this section, the average BER, ergodic channel capacity, and the outage probability of the
MPPM FSO over the generalized M atmospheric turbulence channel are plotted and analyzed
based on the derivations carried out in the previous section. The MPPM FSO system is assumed
to have noise standard deviation σ ¼ 5 × 10−7 A∕Hz,26 photodetector responsivity of 0.5 A∕W.
Additionally, the beam radius is assumed to be ωL ¼ 2.5 m at a distance of 1 km and the jitter
standard deviation is assumed to be σ s ¼ 30 cm.17,32
Following the alternative specification of the atmospheric turbulence regime using the scat-
tering parameters as in Ref. 17 and some references therein, for weak turbulence, the value of α
has been taken as 4, whereas β is 9. For moderate turbulence, α has been taken to be 3 and β is 5.
For strong turbulence, α is 1 and β is 2.
Moreover, for all cases, the average optical power is normalized as Ω þ 2bo ¼ 1.21
Figure 1 shows the average BER performance of MPPM over the generalized atmospheric
FSO turbulence channel, which is evaluated using Eq. (20) against the average transmitted power
for 4PPM and 2PPM in different strength of the atmospheric turbulence. In Fig. 1, the effect of
pointing errors has not been taken into account. For both MPPM schemes, we observe that the
BER is improved as the average transmitted power is increased. Also that the BER degrades as
the turbulence strength increases from weak to strong. The differences between the BER per-
formance of 4PPM and 2PPM drastically decline with the increase in the atmospheric turbu-
lence. In the case of strong turbulence, the two BER curves even coincide. Increase in the
modulation order, M, improves the BER in weak to moderate turbulence conditions but can
hardly do so in strong atmospheric turbulence conditions. Obviously, these results show good
agreement with previous published literature for single different statistical distributions.
To scrutinize the performance of the MPPM FSO system in turbulence conditions, while
taking into account the pointing errors, Figs. 2 and 3 have been plotted. In Fig. 2, the BER
of MPPM FSO system over M turbulence channel has been considered at a wavelength of
1550 nm. Figure 3 shows the same at a wavelength of 850 nm. It can be observed that the
BER of short wavelength (850 nm) is better than the BER of long wavelength (1550 nm).
This is evident from Eq. (3), which reveals that the transceiver telescope gain is inversely propor-
tional to the wavelength. Hence, at a shorter wavelength, a better performance can be realized.
For example, for 4PPM to achieve a BER of 10−2 in the presence of pointing errors, when the
operating wavelength is 1550 nm, a transmitted power of 14.61 dBm is required in weak tur-
bulence and 20 dBm in moderate turbulence. When operating at a wavelength of 850 nm, to
achieve the same BER using 4PPM, an average transmitted power of 9.36 dBm is required in
weak turbulence and 13.1 dBm in moderate turbulence. Hence, less transmitted power is
required to achieve the same BER when using shorter wavelength.
100
Strong
–2
10
10–4 Moderate
M=4
M=2
BER
10–6
Strong
–8
10
10–10
10–12
–15 –10 –5 0 5 10 15 20
Pt (dBm)
Fig. 1 Average BER versus average transmitted power for MPPM.

100
Strong
10–1
M=4
M=2
BER
10–2 Moderate
Weak
10–3
10–4
0 5 10 15 20
Pt (dBm)
Fig.2 Average BER versus average transmitted power at an operational wavelength of 1550 nm.
100
Strong
10–1
10–2
M=4
BER
–3 M=2
10
Moderate
–4
10
Weak
–5
10
10–6
0 5 10 15 20
P (dBm)
t
Fig. 3 Average BER versus average transmitted power at an operational wavelength of 850 nm.
22
20
18
16
C /B bits/s/Hz
14
12
10 Weak M = 4
Moderate M = 4
8 Strong M = 4
Weak M = 2
6 Moderate M = 2
Strong M = 2
4
0 5 10 15 20
Power (dBm)
Fig. 4 Ergodic channel capacity.

100
10–2
P out
Weak M = 4
–4
10 Moderate M = 4
Strong M = 4
Weak M = 2
Moderate M = 2
Strong M = 2
10–6
10 15 20 25 30
SNRth (dB)
Fig. 5 Outage probability versus threshold SNR.
Figure 4 shows the numerical results of ergodic channel capacity against transmitted power
obtained from Eq. (26). Weak to strong atmospheric turbulence conditions have been considered
as mentioned earlier. Generally, as the average transmitted power is increased, the channel ergo-
dic capacity also increases across all turbulence conditions. 4PPM has a large ergodic channel
capacity than 2PPM in all channel conditions from weak to strong. Here unlike the BER varia-
tion, the difference between the ergodic capacity of 4PPM and 2PPM is maintained in weak,
moderate, and strong atmospheric turbulence conditions. For the case of BER, the observation is
that the difference in BER between 4PPM and 2PPM almost vanishes in strong atmospheric
turbulence conditions.
The outage probability of the MPPM over generalized FSO channel is described in Fig. 5.
The outage probability is analyzed against threshold SNR (SNRth ) for both 2PPM and 4PPM in
all turbulence regimes. The transmitter power has been considered as 10 dBm. The outage prob-
ability in general for both MPPM modulation orders start low and increases with increasing
SNRth till an SNRth value of about 25 dB. Therefrom, the outage probability varies slowly and
tends to approach a constant value 10−1 . Here Pout converges to this value for all MPPM modu-
lation orders and in all turbulence regimes from weak to strong. Moreover, the differences in the
Pout for 4PPM and 2PPM decrease as the turbulence strength increases. For the case of 4MPPM,
Pout becomes equal for all turbulence regimes at an SNRth of 25 dB, and such a convergence is
observed at an SNRth of 18 dB for the case of 2MPPM.
7 Conclusion
In this work, using the generalized atmospheric FSO turbulence distribution channel, we have
presented a performance analysis of the MPPM. We have presented the generalized closed
form mathematical expressions for the evaluation of the BER, ergodic channel capacity,
channel information rate, and the outage probability, all for MPPM. Furthermore, crucial
parameters such as the operational wavelength and the modulation order effects on the said
performance metrics have been scrutinized. The results show that increasing the modulation
order is an important consideration in weak to strong atmospheric turbulence. However, the
improvement is insignificant in strong atmospheric turbulence. The ergodic channel capacity
for higher order MPPM is better than that for lower order MPPM. Although it increases with
increasing transmitter power, the difference between 4PPM and 2PPM is maintained across all
turbulence regimes. The outage probability for MPPM has been observed to increase with
increasing threshold SNR. It slowly approaches a constant value and thereafter remains almost
constant. The obtained results can be very important for designing of FSO communication
links in real circumstances.

Acknowledgments
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
References
1. W. O. Popoola, Z. Ghassemlooy, and V. Ahmadi, “Performance of sub-carrier modulated
free-space optical communication link in negative exponential atmospheric turbulence
environment,” Int. J. Auton. Adapt. Commun. Syst. 1(3), 342–355 (2008).
2. K. Prabu and D. S. Kumar, “BER analysis of DPSK-SIM over MIMO free space optical
links with misalignment,” Opt.-Int. J. Light Electron Opt. 125(18), 5176–5180 (2014).
3. D. Kedar and S. Arnon, “Urban optical wireless communication networks: the main
challenges and possible solutions,” IEEE Commun. Mag. 42(5), S2–S7 (2004).
4. V. Sharm and N. Kumar, “Improved analysis of 2.5 Gbps-inter-satellite link (ISL) in inter-
satellite optical-wireless communication (IsOWC) system,” Opt. Commun. 286, 99–102
(2013).
5. M. Uysal, J. Li, and M. Yu, “Error rate performance analysis of coded free-space optical
links over gamma–gamma atmospheric turbulence channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless
Commun. 5(6), 1229–1233 (2006).
6. A. K. Majumdar, “Free-space laser communication performance in the atmospheric channel,”
J. Opt. Fiber Commun. Rep. 2(4), 345–396 (2005).
7. T. A. Tsiftsis et al., “Optical wireless links with spatial diversity over strong atmospheric
turbulence channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. 8(2), 951–957 (2009).
8. J. Li, J. Q. Liu, and D. P. Taylor, “Optical communication using subcarrier PSK inten-
sity modulation through atmospheric turbulence channels,” IEEE Trans. Commun. 55(8),
1598–1606 (2007).
9. W. O. Popoola and Z. Ghassemlooy, “BPSK subcarrier intensity modulated free-space opti-
cal communications in atmospheric turbulence,” J. Lightwave Technol. 27(8), 967–973
(2009).
10. H. Sugiyama and K. Nosu, “MPPM: a method for improving the band-utilization efficiency
in optical PPM,” J. Lightwave Technol. 7(3), 465–472 (1989).
11. Z. Ghassemlooy, W. Popoola, and S. Rajbhandari, Optical Wireless Communications:
System and Channel Modelling with Matlab®, 1st ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida
(2017).
12. M. K. Simon and V. A. Vilnrotter, “Multi-pulse pulse-position-modulation signaling for
optical communication with direct detection,” IPN Prog. Rep. 42, 155 (2003).
13. H. E. Nistazakis, V. D. Assimakopoulos, and G. S. Tombras, “Performance estimation
of free space optical links over negative exponential atmospheric turbulence channels,”
Opt.-Int. J. Light Electron Opt. 122(24), 2191–2194 (2011).
14. M. Z. Hassan, X. Song, and J. Cheng, “Subcarrier intensity modulated wireless optical
communications with rectangular QAM,” IEEE/OSA J. Opt. Commun. Networking 4(6),
522–532 (2012).
15. G. R. Osche, “Optical detection theory for laser applications,” in Optical Detection Theory
for Laser Applications, G. R. Osche, Ed., p. 424, Wiley-VCH (2002).
16. L. C. Andrews and R. L. Phillips. Laser Beam Propagation Through Random Media,
vol. 152, SPIE Press, Bellingham, Washington (2005).
17. K. Prabu, P. P. Bharati, and D. S. Kumar, “Performance analysis of DPSK-SIM based
FSO system over strong atmospheric turbulence channel,” in Annu. IEEE India Conf.
(INDICON), IEEE (2013).
18. A. Jurado-Navas et al., “A unifying statistical model for atmospheric optical scintillation,”
pp. 181–206, InTech, Rijeka, Croatia (2011).
19. A. Jurado-Navas et al., “General analytical expressions for the bit error rate of atmospheric
optical communication systems,” Opt. Lett. 36(20), 4095–4097 (2011).
20. H. Samimi, “Optical communication using subcarrier intensity modulation through gener-
alized turbulence channels,” IEEE/OSA J. Opt. Commun. Networking 4(5), 378–381
(2012).

21. J. Vellakudiyan et al., “Performance of a subcarrier intensity modulated differential phase-

shift keying over generalized turbulence channel,” AEU-Int. J. Electron. Commun. 69(11),
1569–1573 (2015).
22. A. E. Morra et al., “Performance analysis of both shot-and thermal-noise limited multipulse
PPM receivers in gamma-gamma atmospheric channels,” J. Lightwave Technol. 31(19),
3142–3150 (2013).
23. K. Prabu, D. S. Kumar, and T. Srinivas, “Performance analysis of FSO links under strong
atmospheric turbulence conditions using various modulation schemes,” Opt.-Int. J. Light
Electron Opt. 125(19), 5573–5581 (2014).
24. W. Gappmair, S. Hranilovic, and E. Leitgeb, “Performance of PPM on terrestrial FSO links
with turbulence and pointing errors,” IEEE Commun. Lett. 14(5), 468–470 (2010).
25. K. Kiasaleh, “Performance of APD-based, PPM free-space optical communication systems
in atmospheric turbulence,” IEEE Trans. Commun. 53(9), 1455–1461 (2005).
26. X. Yi et al., “BER performance analysis for M-ary PPM over gamma-gamma atmospheric
turbulence channels,” in 6th Int. Conf. Wireless Commun. Networking and Mob. Comput.
(WiCOM), IEEE (2010).
27. M. Miao, X. F. Li, and Y. M. Li, “Performance analysis of PPM modulation in log-normal
fading channels of FSO,” Proc. SPIE 11048, 110480R (2019).
28. G. Xu, “Error performance of deep space optical communication with M-ary pulse position
modulation over coronal turbulence channels,” Opt. Express 27(9), 13344–13356 (2019).
29. A. Polishuk and S. Arnon, “Optimization of a laser satellite communication system with
an optical preamplifier,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 21(7), 1307–1315 (2004).
30. A. Prokeš, “Modeling of atmospheric turbulence effect on terrestrial FSO link,”
Radioengineering 18(1), 42–47 (2009).
31. K. Kiasaleh, “Channel estimation for FSO channels subject to gamma–gamma turbulence,”
in Proc. ICSOS, pp. 1–7 (2012).
32. A. A. Farid and S. Hranilovic, “Outage capacity optimization for free-space optical links
with pointing errors,” J. Lightwave Technol. 257, 1702–1710 (2007).
33. N. Mishra and D. S. Kumar, “Outage analysis of relay assisted FSO systems over
K-distribution turbulence channel,” in Int. Conf. Electr., Electron., and Optim. Tech.
(ICEEOT), IEEE (2016).
34. P. Wang et al., “On the performances of relay-aided FSO system over M distribution with
pointing errors in presence of various weather conditions,” Opt. Commun. 367, 59–67
(2016).
35. V. S. Adamchik and O. I. Marichev, “The algorithm for calculating integrals of hypergeo-
metric type functions and its realization in REDUCE system,” in Proc. Int. Symp. Symbolic
and Algebraic Comput., ACM (1990).
36. “The mathematical functions site,” http://functions.wolfram.com/.
Simbarashe Magidi received his MTech degree in communication engineering from Vellore
Institute of Technology, Vellore, India, in 2018. Currently, he is a PhD research scholar in the
Department of Communication Engineering at Vellore Institute of Technology, India. His current
research interests include free space optical communication, radio over free space, and fiber-
optic communication.
Jabeena A. Afthab received her BE degree (ECE) from the Government College of
Technology, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore, India, her ME degree in applied electronics
from Sathyabama University, and her PhD in optical wireless communication from VIT
University, Vellore, India. She is currently working as an associate professor at the School
of Electronics Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, India. She has more than
28 years of work experience. She has authored textbook on Communication Theory and has
written many papers. Further, she is a reviewer in international journals.

OE-Performance Analysis of Multipulse Position Modulation Free Space Optical Communication System Under Generalized Atmospheric Turbulence Conditions Including Pointing Errors

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

OE-Performance Analysis of Multipulse Position Modulation Free Space Optical Communication System Under Generalized Atmospheric Turbulence Conditions Including Pointing Errors

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Performance analysis of multipulse

position modulation free space

Simbarashe Magidi, Jabeena A. Afthab, “Performance analysis of multipulse position modulation

Simbarashe Magidi* and Jabeena A. Afthab

*Address all correspondence to Simbarashe Magidi, E-mail: magidisimbarashe37@gmail.com

0091-3286/2020/$28.00 © 2020 SPIE

Optical Engineering 016107-1 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

Optical Engineering 016107-2 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

2.1 Channel Model

Optical Engineering 016107-3 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

2.2 Pointing Errors

2.3 Combined Channel Fading Model

Optical Engineering 016107-4 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

where f hjha ðhjha Þ is the conditional probability expressed as

Thus the PDF of I can be simplified as

Substituting Eq. (4) into Eq. (15):

Then substituting Eqs. (16) and (13) into Eq. (17):

Optical Engineering 016107-5 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

CðhÞ ¼ Bw log2 ½1 þ SNRðhÞ:

This can be further expressed as

Optical Engineering 016107-6 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

Pout ¼ P½SNRðhÞ ≤ SNRth :

Optical Engineering 016107-7 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

6 Results and Discussions

Fig. 1 Average BER versus average transmitted power for MPPM.

Optical Engineering 016107-8 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

Fig. 4 Ergodic channel capacity.

Optical Engineering 016107-9 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

Fig. 5 Outage probability versus threshold SNR.

Optical Engineering 016107-10 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

Optical Engineering 016107-11 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

21. J. Vellakudiyan et al., “Performance of a subcarrier intensity modulated differential phase-

Optical Engineering 016107-12 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)

Вам также может понравиться