Study of the Optimum Frequency at 2.4GHz ISM Band for Underwater Wireless Ad Hoc Communications

  • Sandra Sendra
  • Jose V. Lamparero
  • Jaime Lloret
  • Miguel Ardid
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7363)


Underwater communications at low frequencies are characterized by the low data rate. But in some cases wireless sensors must be placed quite close to each other and need high data rates in order to accurately sense an ecosystem that could be contaminated by invasive plants or hazardous waste. Most researchers focus their efforts on increasing the data transfer rates for low frequencies, but, due to the wave features, this is very complicated. For this reason, we propose the use of high frequency band communications for these special cases. In this paper we measure the optimum working frequency for an underwater communication in the 2.4 GHz range. We measure the number of lost packets and the average round trip time value for a point-to-point link for different distances. These measures will be performed by varying the data rate, the type of modulation and the working frequency. We will show that we are able to transmit higher data transfer rates, by using higher frequencies, than the using acoustic waves.


Underwater Wireless Ad Hoc Communications 2.4 GHz UWSN 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Mohsin, A.H., Bakar, K.A., Adekiigbe, A., Ghafoor, K.Z.: A Survey of Energy-aware Routing protocols in Mobile Ad-hoc Networks: Trends and Challenges. Network Protocols and Algorithms 3(4), 1–17 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Segal, M.: Improving Lifetime of Wireless Sensor Networks. Network Protocols and Algorithms 1(2), 48–60 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garcia, M., Sendra, S., Atenas, M., Lloret, J.: Underwater Wireless Ad-hoc Networks: a Survey. In: Mobile Ad hoc Networks: Current Status and Future Trends, pp. 379–411. CRC Press (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chakraborty, U., Tewary, T., Chatterjee, R.P.: Exploiting the loss-frequency relationship using RF communication in Underwater communication networks. In: Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Computers and Devices for Communication, CODEC 2009, Kolkata, India, December 14-16 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liebe, H.J., Hufford, G.A., Manabe, T.: A model for the complex permittivity of water at frequencies below 1 THz. International Journal of Infrared and Millimeter Waves 12(7), 659–675 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Somaraju, R., Trumpf, J.: Frequency, Temperature and Salinity Variation of the Permittivity of Seawater. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 54(11), 3441–3448 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    IEEE Std 802.11, IEEE Standard for Information technology—telecommunications and information exchange between systems—Local and metropolitan area networks—Specific requirements—Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications, New York, USA, pp.1–1184 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chaitanya, D.E., Sridevi, C.V., Rao, G.S.B.: Path loss analysis of underwater communication systems. In: 2011 IEEE Students’ Technology Symposium (TechSym 2011), Kharagpur, India, January 14-16, pp. 65–70 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sehgal, A., Tumar, I., Schonwalder, J.: Variability of available capacity due to the effects of depth and temperature in the underwater acoustic communication channel. In: OCEANS 2009 – EUROPE, Bremen, Germany, May 11-14, pp. 1–6 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arnon, S.: Underwater optical wireless communication network. Journal of Optical Engineering 49, 015001 (January 15, 2010), doi: 10.1117/1.3280288Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hunt, K.P., Niemeier, J.J., Kruger, A.: RF communications in underwater wireless sensor networks. In: IEEE International Conference on Electro/Information Technology 2010, Normal, Illinois, USA, May 20-22 (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jiang, S., Georgakopoulos, S.: Electromagnetic Wave Propagation into Fresh Water. Journal of Electromagnetic Analysis and Applications 3(07), 261–266 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sendra, S., Lamparero, J.V., Lloret, J., Ardid, M.: Underwater Communications in Wireless Sensor Networks using WLAN at 2,4Ghz. In: International Workshop on Marine Sensors and Systems (MARSS), Valencia, Spain, October 17-22 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martin, F., Gorday, P., Adams, J., Leeuwen, H.V.: IEEE 802.15.4 PHY Capabilities (May 2004 ) Doc.: 15-04-0227-04-004A,
  15. 15.
    Chitode, J.S.: Digital Communications, 1st edn. Technical Publications Pune (2007-2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Andren, C., Webster, M.: CCK Modulation Delivers 11Mbps for High Rate 802.11 Extension. In: Proceedings of the Wireless Symposium/Portable By Design Conference, San Jose, CA, USA, February 22-26 (Spring 1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lloret, J., López, J.J., Ramos, G.: Wireless LAN Deployment in Large Extension Areas: The Case of a University Campus. In: Proceedings of Communication Systems and Networks 2003, Benalmádena, Málaga, Spain, September 8-10 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ardid, M.: ANTARES: An Underwater Network of Sensors for Neutrino Astronomy and Deep-Sea Research. Ad Hoc & Sensor Wireless Networks 8, 21–34 (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Garcia, M., Sendra, S., Lloret, G., Lloret, J.: Monitoring and Control Sensor System for Fish Feeding in Marine Fish Farms. IET Communications 5(12), 1682–1690 (2011); The Institution of Engineering and Technology CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sandra Sendra
    • 1
  • Jose V. Lamparero
    • 1
  • Jaime Lloret
    • 1
  • Miguel Ardid
    • 1
  1. 1.Instituto de Investigación para la Gestión Integrada de zonas CosterasUniversidad Politécnica de ValenciaGrao de GandiaSpain

Personalised recommendations