ETRI Journal

Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (한국전자통신연구원)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Performance analysis of DSSS- and CSS-based physical layer for IoT transmission over LEO satellites

  • Jung, Sooyeob (Department of Electrical Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Im, Gyeongrae (Satellite Wide-Area Infra Research Section, Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute) ;
  • Jung, Dong-Hyun (Satellite Wide-Area Infra Research Section, Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute) ;
  • Kim, Pansoo (Satellite Wide-Area Infra Research Section, Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute) ;
  • Ryu, Joon Gyu (Satellite Wide-Area Infra Research Section, Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute) ;
  • Kang, Joonhyuk (Department of Electrical Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology)
  • Received : 2021.03.23
  • Accepted : 2021.11.16
  • Published : 2022.08.10
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

To determine a suitable waveform for Internet of Things (IoT) transmission over low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellites, this paper reports the results of a performance comparison between chirp spread spectrum (CSS)-based LoRa and direct sequence spread spectrum (DSSS)-based Ingenu. The performance of both waveforms was measured in terms of the packet error rate, throughput, and packet loss rate, considering the Doppler effect caused by the high speed of LEO satellites and the interference among multiple terminals. Simulation results indicate that the DSSS scheme is more suitable than the CSS scheme for high-traffic IoT services because of its robustness against interference among multiple terminals. However, the CSS scheme is more suitable than the DSSS scheme for high-mobility IoT services because of its robustness against the Doppler effect. We discuss various solutions, such as the preprocessing of Doppler effect and avoidance of packet collision, to enhance the performance of the DSSS and CSS schemes. The simulation results of the proposed solution show that the enhanced DSSS scheme can be a proper waveform in IoT transmission over LEO satellites for both the high-traffic and high-mobility services.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by Institute of Information and Communications Technology Planning and Evaluation (IITP) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (No. 2020-0-00843, Development of low-power satellite multiple access core technology based on LEO cubesat for global IoT service)

References

  1. 3GPP TS 36.211 v.14.3.0, LTE: Evolved universal terrestrial radio access (E-UTRA); physical channels and modulation (Release 14), 2017.
  2. Semtech, LoRa Modem Design Guide: SX1272/3/6/7/8/9, 2020, available at https://www.semtech.com/
  3. Sigfox, Sigfox Technology, 2020. available at https://www.sigfox.com/
  4. IEEE Standard, IEEE standard for local and metropolitan area networks-Part 15.4: Low-rate wireless personal area networks (LR-WPANs), Amendment 5: Physical layer specifications for low energy, critical infrastructure monitoring networks, 2013.
  5. C. C. Chan, A. Al-Hourani, J. Choi, K. M. Gomez, and S. Kandeepan, Performance modeling framework for IoT-over-satellite using shared radio spectrum, MDPI Remote Sens 12 (2020), no. 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12101666
  6. 3GPP TR 38.811 v.0.1.0, Study on new radio (NR) to support non-terrestrial networks (Release 15), 2017.
  7. Y. S. Song, S. K. Lee, J. W. Lee, D. W. Kang, and K. W. Min, Analysis of adjacent channel interference using distribution function for V2X communication systems in the 5.9-GHz band for ITS, ETRI J. 41 (2019), no. 6, 703-714. https://doi.org/10.4218/etrij.2018-0249
  8. H. Zhang, X. Chu, W. Guo, and S. Wang, Coexistence of Wi-Fi and heterogeneous small cell networks sharing unlicensed spectrum, IEEE Commun. Mag. 53 (2015), no. 3, 158-164. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2015.7060498
  9. Ingenu, RPMA: Technology for the Internet of Things, 2015, available at https://www.ingenu.com
  10. A. Ikpehai, B. Adebisi, K. M. Rabie, K. Anoh, R. E. Ande, M. Hammoudeh, H. Gacanin, and U. M. Mbanaso, Low-power wide area network technologies for internet-of-things: A comparative review, IEEE IoT J. 6 (2019), no. 2, 2225-2240.
  11. J. P. Queralta, T. N. Gia, Z. Zou, H. Tenhunen, and T. Westerlund, Comparative study of LPWAN technologies on unlicensed bands for M2M communication in the IoT: Beyond LoRa and LoRaWAN, in Proc. Int. Conf. Future Netw. Commun. (Halifax, Canada), Aug. 2019, pp. 343-350.
  12. Y. Qian, L. Ma, and X. Liang, Symmetry chirp spread spectrum modulation used in LEO satellite Internet of Things, IEEE Commun. Lett. 22 (2018), no. 11, 2230-2233. https://doi.org/10.1109/lcomm.2018.2866820
  13. Y. Qian, L. Ma, and X. Liang, The performance of chirp signal used in LEO satellite Internet of Things, IEEE Commun. Lett. 23 (2019), no. 8, 1319-1322. https://doi.org/10.1109/lcomm.2019.2920829
  14. US7773664 B2, Random phase multiple access system with meshing, 2010.
  15. P. Kim, S. Jung, D. H. Jung, J. G. Ryu, and D. G. Oh, Performance analysis of direct sequence spread spectrum aloha for LEO satellite based IoT service, in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (Honolulu, HI, USA), Sept. 2019, pp. 1-5.
  16. A. Berni and W. Gregg, On the utility of chirp modulation for digital signaling, IEEE Trans. Commun. 21 (1973), no. 6, 748-751. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCOM.1973.1091721
  17. G. Ferre and A. Giremus, LoRa physical layer principle and performance analysis, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Electron. Circuits Syst. (Bordeaux, France), Dec. 2018, pp. 65-68.
  18. A. O. Afisiadis, A. Burg, and A. Balatsoukas-Stimming, Coded LoRa frame error rate analysis, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. (Dublin, Ireland), June 2020, pp. 1-6.
  19. Y. Tada and S. Kato, A star-topology sensor network system for agriculture using 802.15.4K standard, in Proc. IEEE Personal, Indoor Mobile Radio Commun. (London, UK), June 2013, pp. 76-80.
  20. 3GPP TR 36.763 v1.0.0, 3GPP; technical specification group radio access network; study on narrow-band Internet of Things (NB-IoT) /enhanced machine type communication (eMTC) support for non-terrestrial networks (NTN) (Release 17), 2021.
  21. I. Ali, N. Al-Dhahir, and J. Hershey, Doppler characterization for LEO satellites, IEEE Trans. Commun. 46 (1998), no. 3, 309-313. https://doi.org/10.1109/26.662636
  22. B. Vucetic and J. Du, Channel modeling and simulation in satellite mobile communication systems, IEEE J. Selected Areas Commun. 10 (1992), no. 8, 1209-1218. https://doi.org/10.1109/49.166746
  23. L. M. Davis, I. B. Collings, and R. J. Evans, Estimation of LEO satellite channels, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Inform., Commun. Sig. Process. (Singapore), Sept. 1997. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICICS.1997.647048
  24. Y. Roth, The physical layer for low power wide area networks: A study of combined modulation and coding associated with an iterative receiver, July 2017, available at HAL Id: tel-01568794. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01568794v1
  25. B. Laporte-Fauret, M. A. Temim, G. Ferre, D. Dallet, B. Minger, and L. Fuche, An enhanced LoRa-Like receiver for the simultaneous reception of two interfering signals, in Proc. IEEE Personal, Indoor Mobile Radio Commun. (Istanbul, Turkey), Sept. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/PIMRC.2019.8904258
  26. A. Fanfani, S. Morosi, L. Ronga, and E. Del Re, Frequency recovery techniques for TM/TC satellite modem in critical scenarios, Int. J Satell. Commun. Netw. 36 (2017), no. 36, 179-193.
  27. B. Tahir, S. Schwarz, and M. Rupp, BER comparison between convolutional, Turbo, LDPC, and polar codes, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Telecommun. (Limassol, Cyprus), May 2017. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICT.2017.7998249
  28. I. Stankovic, C. Ioana, and M. Dakovic, Sequence comparison in reconstruction and targeting in underwater sonar imaging, in Proc. IEEE OCEANS (Marseille, France), 2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANSE.2019.8867478
  29. J. Bendetto and J. Donatelli, Ambiguity function and frametheoretic properties of periodic zero-autocorrelation waveforms, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. 1 (2007), no. 1, 6-20. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTSP.2007.897044
  30. A. Kebo, I. Konstantinidis, J. J. Benedetto, M. R. Dellomo, and J. M. Sieracki, Ambiguity and sidelobe behavior of CAZAC coded waveforms, in Proc. IEEE Radar Conf. (Waltham, MA, USA), 2007. https://doi.org/10.1109/RADAR.2007.374198
  31. T. Elshabrawy and J. Robert, Evaluation of the BER performance of LoRa communication using BICM decoding, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Consumer Electron. (Berlin, Germany), Sept. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCE-Berlin47944.2019.8966172