Int. J.

Communications, Network and System Sciences, 2009, 5, 407-421

doi:10.4236/ijcns.2009.25046 Published Online August 2009 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ijcns/).

UWB-Based Localization in Wireless Sensor Networks

Di WU1, 2, Lichun BAO1, Renfa LI2

Donald Bren School of ICS, University of California, Irvine, USA

School of Computer and Communication, Hunan University, Changsha, China
Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Received March 11, 2009; revised April 21, 2009; accepted May 30, 2009

ABSTRACT
Localization has many important applications in wireless sensor networks, such as object searching and
tracking, remote navigation, location based routing etc. The distance measurements have been based on a
variety of technologies, such as acoustic, infrared, and UWB (ultra-wide band) media for localization purposes. In this paper, we propose UWB-based communication protocols for distance estimation and location
calculation, namely a new UWB coding method, called U-BOTH (UWB based on Orthogonal Variable
Spreading Factor and Time Hopping), an ALOHA-type channel access method and a message exchange
protocol to collect location information. U-BOTH is based on IEEE 802.15.4a that was designed for WPANs
(wireless personal area networks) using the UWB technology. We place our system in coal mine environments, and derive the corresponding UWB path loss model in order to apply the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) method to compute the distances to the reference sensors using the RSSI information, and to
estimate the coordinate of the moving sensor using least squares (LS) method. The performance of the system is validated using theoretic analysis and simulations. Results show that U-BOTH transmission technique
can effectively reduce the bit error rate under the path loss model, and the corresponding ranging and localization algorithms can accurately compute moving object locations in coal mine environments.
Keywords: Orthogonal Variable Spreading Factor (Ovsf), Time Hopping (Th), Ultra-Wide Band (Uwb),
Localization, Ranging

1. Introduction
Large-scale economic wireless sensor networks (WSNs)
become increasing attractive to environmental monitoring,
control and interaction applications. Object tracking and
localization is one of the key challenges for these applications [1]. Various solutions have been proposed based on
two ranging techniques: 1) time of arrival (TOA) [2],
such as GPS, 2) the path loss model based on radio RSSI
signal strength [3] or acoustic signal strength [4] attenuation in relation to the signal propagation distance. Sometimes, range-free techniques are also applied to estimation
locations, such as hop count or centroid methods [5].
However, most of these localization methods require
*

This work was sponsored in parts by the National Natural Science

Foundation of China under Grant No. 60673061 and the Raytheon
Company under Grant No. RC-42621.

Copyright 2009 SciRes.

generic signal propagation and network formation assumptions. In this paper, we place our localization method in coal mine environments for monitoring and tracking human and vehicle locations using multiple reference points installed in the WSNs. This approach is especially valid given the practical value of the localization
system in helping people in the frequent emergency
situations and reducing the high costs of coal mine operations.
Coal mine environments present extremely harsh conditions for wireless communications. First, the power of
the transmitter underground must be reduced to the lowest level to avoid sparkling gas explosions. Secondly,
signal propagations are especially prone to multipath
effects. Third, wireless networks are more dynamic than
surface networks due to signal attenuation, movements
etc. Last but not the least, wireless sensor network in
Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

408

D. WU ET AL.

coal mines is a multiple users system, and the MUI (multiple users interference) has dramatic impacts on the
precision of a localization system. Coding is an important method to depress MUI.
UWB (ultra-wide band) transmission and coding
technologies provide an ideal solution to the coal mine
environment. On one hand, UWB systems can provide
high bandwidth data transmissions; on the other hand,
UWB exhibits excellent characteristics to reduce
co-channel interference. IEEE 802.15.4a is the de facto
standards to provide low power long distant low data rate
service for real-time communication and precise ranging
and localization applications [6,7].
There are many UWB localization algorithms proposed in the past [8-11]. Wang et al. demonstrated the
use of UWB in coal mines to realize short-distance
high-rate applications such as video monitoring, as well
as localization and monitoring [12].
Of the different UWB transmission techniques, Impulse Radio Ultra-wideband (IR-UWB) provides a desirable platform to enable efficient and precise localization solutions in coal mines environments [13]. Different
coding algorithms for IR-UWB communication systems
have been proposed so far, such as DS-UWB (Direct
Sequence UWB) and TH-UWB (Time Hopping UWB)
[14]. However, none was shown to guarantee high quality localization. The simple DS-UWB cannot even meet
the localization requirements when the multipath and
multi-user interference exist. In this paper, we apply the
Orthogonal Variable Spread Factor (OVSF) coding algorithm in IR-UWB networks to solve the multi-user interference problem.
Other than TOA (time-of-arrival), TDOA (time difference of arrival) and AOA (angle of arrival) based
ranging techniques, ranging based on the path loss model
is an intuitive method, especially in low-cost WSNs. The
path loss model defines the signal propagation characteristics, and determines the received signal strength.
Therefore, given the received signal strength (RSSI), we
can estimate the distance between the receiving node and
other reference points using computational methods,
rather than expensive hardware [15]. Several channel
models were proposed to evaluate UWB systems in different propagation environments in the IEEE 802.15.4a.
However, these models relied on insufficient measurements and fixed parameters, and cannot reflect the real
channel characteristics. In [16], a statistical path loss
model was established for channels in the residential
areas based on over 300,000 frequency response measurements. This approach shows good agreement with
measured data, but requires a highly complex modeling
and simulation procedures, as mentioned in IEEE
802.15.4a. Li et al. analyzed the propagation mode of
Copyright 2009 SciRes.

UWB signal in coal mine, and proposed a free-space

propagation alike model based on the existing residential
indoor model [17]. So far, channel path loss modeling in
coal mine environment remains a complex task. In this
paper, we will provide a more practical and accurate coal
mine model using UWB medium based on IEEE
802.15.4a.
Once the range or distance information is available
between the mobile target and the reference points in the
WSNs, the location of the mobile target is fairly easy to
derive. Trilateration is a common approach. Savarese et
al. presented a trilateration algorithm based on least
squares (LS) method in large-scale WSNs [18]. We apply similar method, but because the number of reference
points involved in the localization algorithm could be
limited, the LS method is adapted to run multiple iterations in order to reduce the power consumption of the
reference points, and to provide accurate location coordinates.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2
describes the basic assumptions of the localization system, and some of the symbols used in this paper. Section
3 presents a new IR-UWB coding method, called
U-BOTH (UWB based on Orthogonal Variable Spreading Factor and Time Hopping), and provides the signal
processing model of UWB in coal mine environments.
Section 4 specified a WSN communication protocol in
order to collect reference point location information.
According to the path loss model and the RSSI information gathered by the mobile target, Section 5 and Section
6 present the ranging and localization algorithms using
the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) and the least
squares methods, respectively. Section 7 evaluates the
system using simulations. Section 8 concludes the paper.

2. Assumptions and Notation

Although we focus on coal mine wireless sensor network
(WSN) deployment, the results can be easily adapted to
other deployment scenarios. The key difference between
various WSN deployments is the signal propagation
characteristics, reflected in the path loss model used for
range calculations. In each of these deployment scenarios,
we assume that a number of reference nodes are deployed the network, and have already acquired their exact location coordinate through other means, such as initial location calibrations. The task in our localization
computation is to derive the position coordinate of a mobile target object by running the localization algorithms
on the target. We do not elaborate on the application of
the coordinate information in this paper.
Figure 1 illustrate such a WSN in which a target node,
denoted by triangle, moves across the network. The tar
Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

UWB-BASED LOCALIZATION IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

Figure 1. Wireless sensor network localization using UWB.

409

get node collects the coordinate information of reference

nodes R1 , R2 , R3 and R4 denoted by dots, and their corresponding signal strength, by which to calculate the
ranges between itself and the four reference
nodes, d1 , d2 , d3 and d4 . Afterward, the target node derives its own coordinate, and sends to a sink, denoted by
the square in Figure 1.
In order to enable communication between the target
and reference nodes in the network, we assume that each
and every node in the WSN is able to communicate
through U-BOTH, proposed in this paper.
For convenience, the notation used in this paper is
summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. Notation and meaning.

Notation
Tf

The frame time.

Tc

The chip time.

Tb

The bit time.

Ns

The number of pulses for every bit.

Nc

The number of chips for every frame.

n
j

The OVSF code of transmitter n .

SF

The spreading factor of OVSF code.

Ns

The period of OVSF code.

n
TX

The transmission energy of transmitter n .

n
RX

The received energy of transmitter n .

E
E

p0 (t )

The energy normalized pulse waveform.

c nj

The time-hopping code with period N s .

n
j / N s

The indication of information bit b .

r (t )

The input useful signal of the receiver.

rmui (t )

The input multiple users interference signal of the receiver.

n(t )

The input additive white Gaussian noise of the receiver.

m(t )

The correlation temple of the receiver.

The output useful signal of the receiver.

Z mui

The output multiple users interference of the receiver.

Zn

The output additive white Gaussian noise of the receiver.

N0

The noise spectral density.

The delay of the other transmitters interfering pulse.

The mean value of variable x .

The standard deviation of a random variable x .

erfc( x)

The complementary error function of value x .

Prb

Copyright 2009 SciRes.

Meaning

The bit error rate (BER).

Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

410

D. WU ET AL.

3. Physical Layer Model

3.1. UWB Signal Spreading and Modulation
First of all to achieve accurate localization in wireless
communication, we need a reliable physical layer communication technique that reduces bit error rate (BER),
while mitigating the multi-users-interference (MUI) and
Gaussian noise interference. Our physical layer is a
UWB system based on time-hopping (TH) signal transmission as well as OVSF (orthogonal variable spread
factor) for spreading out the symbols.
OVSF (Orthogonal Variable Spread Factor) was extensively used in CDMA systems to provide variable
spreading codes [19]. Shorter OVSF code lengths are
usually optimized for short distance, high data rate
transmission in less crowed environments due to its
smaller spreading factor. On the other hand, time hopping (TH) is one of many signal modulation methods
used by UWB. We will apply the time-hopping pulse
position modulation (TH-PPM) algorithm to encode
UWB pulse streams, and OVSF direct sequence to
spread the user data bit stream, called U-BOTH (UWB
modulation Based on OVSF and Time Hopping).
Figure 2 illustrates the utilization of time hopping (TH)
pulse position modulation and OVSF spreading to encode a single bit in the user data stream. First, U-BOTH
sends each bit in the bit time, denoted by Tb . Then it
modulates the bit 1 using a TH code, 12110021, in which
each digit denotes a chip slot position within a frame
time, T f , to send a broadband radio pulse. The number of
pulses is denoted by N s . Therefore, each bit duration
is Tb T f N s . Each chip slot lasts for Tc , sufficient to
send a short UWB pulse signal.
After the initial pulse position modulation using UWB
signals, the pulse sequence is again applied with OVSF
code so that the phases are shifted by to provide orthogonality between multiple users. The length of the

OVSF code is called the spread factor SF, which is equal

to N s .
In our system, the TH code is a pseudo-random sequence generated from foreknown seeds, such as node
IDs. And the OVSF codes are selected from a well- defined set of orthogonal spreading codes.
To formally analyze the system in this paper, we represent the transmitted signal by the nth transmitter in
Equation (1):
s(n) t

n
j

n
anj / N s ETX
p0 t jT f c nj Tc ,

(1)

in which, d nj 1 is the OVSF code with the pen

is the energy of the n-th transmitter, p0 (t ) is
riod N s , ETX
the
energy
normalized
pulse
waveform,
c nj [0, N c 1] is
the
TH
code
with
pe-

riod N s and anj / N s indicates the data stream bit. If the data
bit is 1, anj / N s 1 . Otherwise, anj / N s 1 .
At the receiver side, the received signal consists of
three source of information:
r t ru t rmui t n t ,

in which, ru (t ) is the desired user signal, rmui (t ) is

co-channel interference from multiple users, and n(t ) is
the additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN).
n
Denote the pulse energy of the n-th transmitter as ERX
.
Without loss of generality, we assume that the first users
transmission is the desired signal at the receiver for simplicity, then Equation (2) provides the desired signal
function at the receiver:
ru t

da

1 1
j j / N s

1
ERX
p0 t jT f c1j Tc .

(2)

We define the correlation template of the receiver:

m t

( i 1) N s 1

j iN s

d 1j p0 t jT f c1j Tc ; i , .

(3)

3.2. Single User System Analysis

As the first step, we assume that the channel is the
AWGN multipath-free channel, and that the transmitter
and the receiver are synchronized. In a single user signal
processing system, the input of the receiver has two parts:
ru (t ) and n(t ) , and the output of the receiver in time interval [0, Tb] is represented by:

r t n t m t dt .

Figure 2. U-BOTH: Interference resistant UWB modulation

using time hopping and OVSF.

Z Z Zn

Copyright 2009 SciRes.

Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

Tb

(4)

411

UWB-BASED LOCALIZATION IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

In Equation (4), the useful output signal is:
Z

N s 1

j 0

jT f c1j Tc Tc

1
d 1j d 1j a1 j / N s ERX
t dt ,

jT f c1j Tc

where t p0 t jT f c1j Tc p0 t jT f c1j Tc .

Because d 1j d 1j 1 , p0 (t ) is the energy normalized pulse
waveform, we have

N s 1

Tc

j 0

1
a1 j / N s ERX
p0 t p0 t dt

1
N s a1 j / N s ERX

Tc

p0 t p0 t dt

In Equation (4), the output noise signal is:

N s 1

j 0

Tc

d 1j p0 t n t dt

N s 1

d n
j 0

1
j

where n j is Gaussian random variable with mean 0 and

variance N 0 / 2 . Because d 1j is not a random variable, the
variance of Z n is:
N s 1

N
D Z n D d 1j n j N s 0 ,
2
j 0

Zn ~ N 0, N 0 N s / 2 .

Suppose that the statistical probabilities of data bit b =

0 and b = 1 are equal, we obtain the BER (bit error rate)
of the single user system in AWGN channel as follows:
1
1
Prb P Z 0 | b 0 P Z 0| b 1 P Z 0| b 0 .
2
2

Because anj / N s 1 if b = 0, then the useful output is

1
1
Zu a1 j / N s N s ERX
N s ERX
. Using Equation (4),

the BER become:

1
Prb P Z 0 | b 0 P N s ERX
Zn 0

P Zn Ns E

1
RX

Prb

N E1
1
s RX
erfc

2
N0

Copyright 2009 SciRes.

exp t 2 dt .

SF E1
1
RX
erfc

2
N
0

64 R E1
1
0
RX
erfc
2

R
N
0
b

, (5)

3.3. Multi-User Interference Analysis

In multi-user communication system, the received signal
includes multi-user interference Z mui and noises. The
Zu Zn part is the same as Equation (4), but the
multi-user interference Z mui is additional. Because the
phase and delay _ of interfering pulses is random as
shown in Figure 3, we have to compute the interferences
variance.
Suppose that n is uniformly distributed over [0, T f ),
then the interference variance of the desired signal, i.e.
the signal from the 1st user, caused by transmitter n is
[14]:

bit2

Ns
Tf

Tf

n
ERX

d 1j d in p0 t n p0 t dt

Tc

d
2

2
from all
Therefore, the total interference variance mui
other transmitters is:
N

n2

It can be rewritten by complementary error function

erfc( x) as follow:

Equation (5) shows that the BER decrease when the

spreading factor SF increases or when the bit rate decreases. Therefore, we can adjust SF to adapt different
environments with various noise levels while maintaining the same bandwidth of the signal. This is the main
reason we adjust OVSF codes in our system.

n
N s ERX

Because U-BOTH is a rate variable system using

OVSF, we analyze the relation between BER and the bit
rate. Suppose the systems OVSF code is a code tree of 6
layers [20], and the spreading factor is 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64,
respectively. Further suppose the basic rate of our system
is R0 , then the corresponding bit rate of U-BOTH
is Rb iR0 (i = 32, 16, 8, 4, 2, 1, respectively).
Denote the bit rate as Rb , where Rb iR0 , i = 1, 232,
we can get the relation between BER and the bit rate:
Prb

1
a1 j / N s N s ERX
.

Zn

where erfc x

Tf

Tf

Tc

d 1j din p0 t n p0 t dt

d
2

Because the delay for all transmitters has the same

distribution, we get the following formula:
2

mui

Ns
Tf

E
n2

n
RX

Tf
0

Tc

d 1j din p0 t n p0 t dt d n

Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

412

D. WU ET AL.
Ns
Tf

M2

E
n2

n
RX

in which,

M2

Tf

Tc

d 1j din p0 t n p0 t dt

d
2

Tf

According to [14], and noticing that Rb

R 2 d .

1
N sT f

and

64 R0
, Equation (6) gives the BER in
Rb
multi-user interference environments.
N s = SF =

1
1

N s ERX
1
1 2 N s ERX

Prb erfc

Nu

2
2 N0
n
2 1
ERX
M

2
f

1
1

128
R
E
ERX
1
1
0 RX

erfc

2 N n
2
2 Rb N 0
M Rb ERX

n2

(6)

4. Network Protocol Operations

4.1. Protocol Operation
Our localization algorithms depend on a two-step processthe first step is for the target node to acquire the
coordinate and signal strength information from reference nodes in the network using U-BOTH based communication protocols, and the second step is for the target node to calculate the distances to the reference nodes,
and infer its own coordinate.
In order to get the necessary coordinate information
from adjacent reference nodes, the following protocol
steps are taken:
1) The mobile node broadcasts a location request message.
2) All the reference nodes send back packet with their
own coordinates. During each short sampling period, a moving node can receive tens of responses
from each of the reference nodes.
In wireless sensor networks, code assignments are
categorized into transmitter-oriented, receiver-oriented or
Copyright 2009 SciRes.

a per-link-oriented code assignment schemes (also

known as TOCA, ROCA and POCA, respectively) [21,
22]. Depending on the ways of assigning the OVSF-TH
codes and encoding the MAC data frames for transmissions, we propose two different ways to implement multiple access protocols using U-BOTH.
a) ROCA-Based Protocol Operations: The first approach is based on the receiver-oriented code assignment
(ROCA), in which case the data packet transmissions are
encoded using the unique OVSF-TH code assigned to the
receiver. Beside ROCA, there is a common OVSF-TH
code for bootstrapping and coordination purposes.
In ROCA scheme, when a target node needs to find
out its coordinate, it sends a location request message
using the common OVSF-TH code to the reference
nodes. The request message includes the request command, and the receivers OVSF-TH code. Upon receiving the request message, each reference nodes sends back
a response message using the receivers OVSF-TH code
using a random backoff mechanism.
The response message includes each reference nodes
identification information, and their coordinates.
b) TOCA-Based Protocol Operations: The second approach is based on transmitter-oriented code assignment
(TOCA), in which case each packet transmission is
encoded using two OVSF-TH codes one is a common
OVSF-TH code to encode the common physical layer
frame header, and the other transmitter-specific code is
to encode the physical layer frame payload. The frame
head includes the transmitter-oriented OVSF-TH code
for encoding the frame payload.
Because the physical layer headers are sent on a
common OVSF-TH code, the physical layer header
transmissions resemble those of ALOHA networks with
regard to packet collision. Because the headers are usually short, the collision probability is low.
On the other hand, because the data frame payload is
transmitted on unique OVSF-TH codes, the interference
between the payload and other frame headers and payloads is dramatically reduced.
In both ROCA- and TOCA-based systems, packets
from the reference nodes can be lost. However, this does
not affect the overall performance of our localization
algorithms because they tolerate such losses.

4.2. Location Calculation Algorithms

We make use of our OVSF-TH-UWB system and provide a UWB sensor localization network for mining applications to monitor environment and mineworker. We
suppose moving nodes and other monitored nodes are the
target nodes and every reference node knows its location.
Suppose target node has a UWB RFID Tag equipped
with transmitter and receiver to assist distributed localization with reference nodes. Data sink collect all the
Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

413

UWB-BASED LOCALIZATION IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

real-time localization information and send out to the
monitoring center outside the mining area, as shown in
Figure 1.
There are two steps in order to estimate the coordinate
of the mobile node:
a) Ranging: Ranging is to estimate the approximate
distance between the target node and the reference nodes.
Target node estimates the distance from it to each reference node according to the RSSI values, using maximum
likelihood estimation.
In this paper, we take ROCA scheme during ranging,
target node broadcasts range-initiate (RI) packets for
range estimates, and neighbor reference nodes reply with
range-response (RR) packets, which include their coordinate and signal strength. To collect ranging and location information as much as possible in a short time, we
take a dual-channel mechanism joint with common code
and receiver code provided by OVSF-TH code. The receiver OVSF-TH code is generated by the unique MAC
ID of receiver. Suppose target node i broadcast a RI
packet via common channel code C0 at t = t1, and begin
to listen the RR packets sent to its unique OVSF-TH
code. This process initiate a window of time from t = t1
to t = t1 + Tw. The window-length Tw is much larger
than RR duration TRR, which allows multiple RR gathered within window duration from adjacent reference
nodes.
Following are the ranging and localization algorithm:
1) Target node i broadcasts RI packet at t = t1 on common code C0. This RI includes node is MAC ID
and OVSFTH code Ci. When there is no interference, the RI arrives at a reference node j.
2) Reference node j delays nT after receiving the RI,
and then reply a RR packet transmitted on the
OVSF-TH code Ci. The RR packet includes node
js MAC ID, transmitted signal strength and node
is MAC ID. Where n is a random positive integer
belong to [1, K], K is the average number of reference nodes in the transmitted range of target node.
The delay nT is used to avoid interference between
RR packets.
3) If t1 < t < t1 +Tw, node j continue to delay nT and
then transmit RR packet via Ci.
4) Other reference nodes in the transmitted range of
node i send RR packets by the same ways as node j
in step 2 and 3.
5) If t = t1 + Tw, node i stop receiving RR packets.]
6) When t = t1 + Tw, node i received multiple RR
packets from different reference nodes and several
RR packets from the same reference node. It uses
all the recorded information of PLi to estimates the
distances to different reference nodes by MLE
based RSSI ranging indicated in Equation (14) in
Section 5.
b) Localization: Coordinate calculation, which is to
Copyright 2009 SciRes.

determine the coordinate of the mobile node according to

the coordinate information of the reference nodes and the
corresponding distance from the target node to the reference nodes. Using the coordinates of the reference nodes
and the estimated distance information, calculate the
coordinate of the target node. It is implemented as follows:
1) When node i estimated all the distances to different
reference nodes in its transmitted range, it applies
these ranging results to Equation (15) in Section 6
and then computes its location based on the least
squares algorithm.
2) When node i estimated its coordinate, it broadcasts
ACK packet via its common channel code C0, informing finish of ranging. Its newest location is
aware to neighbor nodes by the ACK and will arrive at the data sink through the localization routing.
According to above procedures of network protocol
operations, after getting the reference coordinates and the
respective signal strength information, a target node calculates its coordinate in two steps ranging and localization. In order to fully take advantage of U-BOTH
physical model in Section 3, we also design specific
ranging algorithm and localization algorithm for
U-BOTH in following sections.

5. Ranging Algorithm
Ranging is to estimate the approximate distance between
the target node and the reference nodes. We use the
maximum likelihood estimation for such calculations.
First of all, we need to establish the path loss model of
the UWB channel in order to inversely derive the distance information from received signal qualities.

5.1. The Path Loss Model

It is well-known that the path loss model can be expressed by the log-distance path loss law in many indoor
or outdoor environments, as shown by Equation (7).

d
PL d PL0 10 log10
d0

S ; d d 0 ,

(7)

in which
d0 is the reference distance (e.g. 1 meter in UWB
medium),
PL0 means the path loss in dB at d0,
d is the distance between the transmitter (Tx) and
receiver (Rx),

refers to the path loss exponent which depends

on channel and environment,
Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

414

D. WU ET AL.

S is the log-normal shadow fading in dB. Usually,

S is a Gaussian-distributed random variable with
zero mean and standard deviation .

The tunnels environment in coal mine can be regarded as a special type of indoor environments, considering various kinds of concrete environmental factors in
coal mine [17]. Thus, we adopt the UWB path loss
model in coal mine based on residential indoor propagation model.
According to the residential indoor models, the values
of
, and S in Equation (7) are specific in each propagation environment, and could be treated as random variables [16].
Accordingly, the UWB path loss is commonly modeled as:

PL d

dB

PL0 10 log10 d

10n
1

log10 d n2 n2 n3 ,

(8)

in which is the mean value of shadow fadings standard deviation S .

The probability density function (pdf) is:

p PL d

PL PL0 10 log10 d

2 100

log10 d 2
2

2 100 2 log10 d 2 2
2

(9)

However, an unknown distance variable d appears in

both the denominator and the exponents denominator in
Equation (9), so it is hard to develop further statistical
analysis. In addition, the path loss exponent in the
aforementioned model is a random variable, and requires
sufficient measurements on the spot in various residential
environments before effectively being applied in generic
scenarios. Especially, the standard deviation
of the log-normal shadow fading S usually changes
from locations to locations. Even if at the same location,
it may change because of the time-varying channel. Thus,
we need practical method to estimate S, especially for
moving targets.
Therefore, in order to apply above path loss model,
IEEE
802.15.4a Task Group provided Channel Model 1-9 by
taking limited real measurements to determine the values
of , and other variables in different situations. When
deploying real UWB networks, people could approximately choose the corresponding channel model with the
parameters specified in IEEE 802.15.4a.
We propose a UWB coal mine propagation model
based on many other modeling methods for the applicaCopyright 2009 SciRes.

tion of ranging and localization. In this model, the mean

value of the path loss exponent is given for different
tunnel environments, and the log-normal shadow fading
S is represented through a random variable as follows:
S n1 ,

n2 .
Then, the indoor UWB path loss could be expressed
as:

PL d

dB

PL0 10 log10 d n1 n1n2 , (10)

according to Equation (7).

In Equation (10), n1 and n2 are zero-mean Gaussian
variables of unit standard deviation, n1 , n2 ~ N [0,1] .
(PL0+10 log10 d) is the median path loss,
and n1 n1n2 represents the random variation
about the median path loss. According to the 3 principle in Gaussian distribution, the probability of a Gaussian variable lying in the range ( 3 , 3 ) is
99.73%, even though the range of Gaussian random
variable is (, ) . That is, 99.73% value of variables n1 and n2 is within the range of (-3, +3). Furthermore, it dramatically simplifies computation if we use
truncated Gaussian distributions for n1 and n2 so as to
keep and from taking on impractical values. According to [16], we confine n1 , n2 [2, 2] , and
n1n2 [4, 4] .
In aforementioned model,

n1 n1n2 is

not ex-

actly Gaussian because n1n2 is not Gaussian variable.

However, the product is very small with respect to whole
expression of path loss. Thus, the path loss PL(d) is approximately a Gaussian-distributed random variable
with:
n1 n1n2 ~ N 0, 2 2 ,

PL d ~ N PL0 10 log10 d , 2 2 .

The probability density function (pdf) of the path loss

PL(d) is:

p( PL d )

PL PL0 10 log10 d

2 2 2

2 2 2

(11)

Compared with the model in [16], our UWB coal mine

propagation model given by Equation (11) is more convenient to carry out parameter estimation and statistic
analysis because it simplifies the statistics and PDF. What
Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

415

UWB-BASED LOCALIZATION IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

is more, when considering the random influence of the
log-normal shadow fading, this model is generic than
current models in IEEE 802.15.4a.

5.2. Ranging Algorithm Based on Maximum

Likelihood Estimation
The distance between the transmitter Tx and the receiver
Rx in Equation (10) can be calculated by the general
ranging method between two nodes using the RSSI information:
d 10

PL d PL0 n1 n1n2
10

Receiver computes the distance between the transmitter Tx and the receiver Rx using random values n1 and
n2 in the truncated range. This method takes into account
the influence of real log-normal shadow fading on rang ln p PL | d
d

1
10 N

PL0

PL 10

PLi

PL0
10

2 2 2

(12)

The necessary condition to compute the MLE of d is:

(13)

due to ranging errors from thermal noise and other interferences. The least squares algorithm uses multiple reference nodes and the corresponding ranges to improve
accuracy in the presence of error. It first creates following equations:

(14)

6. Localization Algorithm
When computing the location of a wireless sensor node,
there are two types of nodes, the reference node and the
target node. Suppose that we have three reference nodes
with coordinates ( x1 , y1 ) , ( x2 , y2 ) and ( x3 , y3 ) , respectively. The target node computes its coordinate ( x, y ) using trilateration method with the coordinates of reference
nodes and their ranges d1 , d 2 , d 3 , to the target node using
the following equations:
x1 x 2 y1 y 2 d12

2
2

2
x2 x y2 y d 2

2
2
2
x3 x y3 y d3

In practical situations, three reference nodes are usually insufficient to accurately derive the target coordinate
Copyright 2009 SciRes.

i 1

Therefore, the MLE based RSSI UWB ranging is:

d 1010 N i1

2 2 2

1 N

N PLi PL0 10 log10 d 0 .

d ln10 i 1

i 1

p PL | d

PLi PL0 10 log10 d

10 N

We solve Equation (13) and have:

log10 d

ing and decreases the ranging error compared to the

models in IEEE 802.15.4a.
However, the random variables n1 and n2 selected by
the transmitter Tx are not exactly those in the real
time-variant channel. In order to avoid the ranging errors
caused by the large deviation between the simulated
n1 and n2 values and the real n1 and n2 values in each
round of ranging estimation, we propose an iterative
ranging based on MLE (maximum likelihood estimation)
in UWB wireless sensor networks.
Suppose PLi is the ith observation value, we get the
joint conditional pdf p PL d using Equation (12).

x1 x 2 y1 y 2 d12

x2 x 2 y2 y 2 d 22

2
2
2
xn x yn y d n

(15)

where ( xi , yi ) and di (i = 1,2,,n)are the coordinate of

the reference nodes, and the distances to the target node.
These equations can be linearized by subtracting the
last low and performing some minor arithmetic shuffling,
resulting in the following relations AI = b:
x1 xn

x x
A 2 2 n

xn 1 xn

y1 yn
y2 yn

yn 1 yn

x
I ,
y
Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

416

D. WU ET AL.
x12 xn2 y12 yn2 d n2 d12
2

x xn2 y22 yn2 d n2 d 22

b 2
.

2
2
2
2
2
xn 1 xn yn 1 yn d n d n 1
I A A A b .
1

i is the ranging error, i {1, 2,..., n} . From Equation

(16), we have I ( AT A) 1 AT b Mb , where

M ( AT A) 1 AT

b b1

M 1, n 1
,
M 2, n 1

M 1,3

M 2,2

M 2,3

....

....

bn 1

b2

b3

....

x12 xn2 y12 yn2 d n2 d12

2
x xn2 y22 yn2 d n2 d 22 2
2

xn21 xn2 yn21 yn2 d n2 d n21

2d n n 2d 2
.

2n 2d n n 2n 1 2d n 1 n 1
2n 2d n n 12 2d11
2
n

2, i

2
i

2d i i .

(18)

Usually, i ~ N (0, i2 ) , and are mutually independent.

Therefore,
2

n 1

D( x) 2 n4 4d n2 n2 M 1,i
1

n 1

M 2
i 1

2
1,i

4
i

4di2 i2 .

(19)

n 1

D( y ) 2 n4 4d n2 n2 M 2,i
i 1

M 2
n 1
i 1

2
2, i

4
i

4di2 i2 .

(20)

From above deduction, it is shown that localization

error could be reduced proportionally to the reduction in
the ranging error. According to the relation, if we guarantee the accuracy of di in every equation, the trilateration and the least squares algorithm could be kept similarly accurate even if the number of equations is limited.
The proposed ranging solution using MLE based on
RSSI in this paper improves the ranging accuracy between target node and every reference node through iterative ranging, and reduces the ranging error caused by
ranging based on a single round sampling. Furthermore,
it reduces the influence of fixed value of given in our
path loss model on ranging and localization in timevariant channel. Hence, our localization algorithm can
provide accurate ranging and localization with less UWB
reference nodes.

2
2

7. Simulation Results

Denote Bi x x y y d d , we get the

coordinate ( x, y ) of target node:
2
i

2
n

2
i

2
n

2
n

n 1

n 1

i 1

i 1

2
i

x M 1,i Bi 2n 2 d n n M 1,i

M
n 1
i 1

i 1

i 1

(16)

M 1,2

i 1

n 1

Although the least squares algorithm could reduce the

localization error, it requires a large amount of reference
nodes within the communication radius of target node.
Therefore, in the mining application of UWB wireless
sensor networks, it is necessary to balance the cost and
the accuracy.
In the following, we explore the relation between localization error and ranging error and then propose a
modified algorithm based on the least squares algorithm.
Assume that the estimated distance between the target
node and the ith reference node is di d i i , where

M 1,1

M 2,1

n 1

This work employs the following solution:

T

n 1

y M 2,i Bi 2n 2d n n M 2,i

1, i

2
i

2di i .

(17)
Copyright 2009 SciRes.

In order to verify our localization algorithms based on

U-BOTH system for WSNs, we carried out simulation in
the following scenarios:
1) With regard to the BER (bit error rate), we evaluate
U-BOTH system performance in single and
multi-user scenarios.
2) Using the sample network deployment as shown in
Figure 4, we evaluate the ranging accuracy by
comparing the results with the Cramer-Rao lower
bounds.
3) Using the same sample network as shown in Figure
4, we evaluate the impact of the number of iteraInt. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

417

UWB-BASED LOCALIZATION IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

uses direct sequence spreading, and TH-UWB that uses

time-hopping pulse position modulation alone for UWB
transmissions. We can see that the BER of U-BOTH and
the DS-UWB system which use the -phase shift keying
modulation are lower than TH-UWB. This is because the
distance of two signals in binary phase shift keying
(BPSK) modulation is 2 E pulse , but 2 E pulse in TH-

100
90
80
70

Y (m)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

20

40

60

80

100

X (m)

Figure 4. Wireless sensor network simulation for localization.

U-BOTH
DS-UWB
TH-UWB

10

BER

7.2. Evaluation of the Ranging Algorithms

In order to evaluate the performance of the ranging algorithms, we compare the parameter estimation errors
against the Cramer-Rao lower bound (CRLB).
Denote d as the unbiased estimation of the parameter d
from
Equation (13), then the mean square error (MSE)
of d is

10

-1

UWB [23].
Secondly, we let Eb = N0 = 0 dB, Ns = 4 and generated
2000 bits randomly. Figure 6 shows the relative performance of U-BOTH, TH-UWB and DS-UWB systems
in multiple access scenarios. In this case, the received
signal includes by noise and co-channel interference. In
Figure 6, although both the BER and the variance of error bits increase as the number of users increases, the
performance of our U-BOTH system is still better than
DS-UWB and TH-UWB, proving that the UWB coding
based OVSF-TH effectively handle the burst errors.

2
2
MSE d E d d E d E d var d . (21)

-2

10

Hence in unbiased condition, the MSE of d is equal to

the variance. The lower bound of the MSE based on
UWB RSSI ranging could be represented by the CRLB:

-3

10

2 ln p( PL | d )
2 2 d 2 ln 2 10 .
CRLB d E

100 N 2
d 2

-10

-5

0
Eb/No (dB)

10

Figure 5. Bit error rate in a single user system with additive

white Gaussian noise (AWGN).

10

10

U-BOTH
DS-UWB

tions in calculating the coordinate of a specific target

node, indicated by the triangle in the diagram.

Variance of Error Bits

10
BER

7.1. U-BOTH System Performance

TH-UWB
-1

-2

10

We assume the channel is AWGN multipath-free single

user channel; the transmitter and the receiver are synchronized perfectly. Then we randomly generate 2000
bits, every bit uses 4 pulses to repeat coding (Ns = 4).
Figure 5 illustrates the BER of the received signal using U-BOTH system, in contrast to DS-UWB that only
Copyright 2009 SciRes.

10

10

U-BOTH
DS-UWB

TH-UWB

-3

10

4
7
10
15
Numbers of Interfering Users

10
20

4
7
10
15
Numbers of Interfering Users

20

Figure 6. Bit error rate and the variance of the number of

error bits of 2000 generated bits.
Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

418

D. WU ET AL.
ln p( PL | d )
can
d

not be expressed in the form K (d )[d ( PL) d ] . So, the

lower bound of MSE can not reach the CRLB. However,
we can use the
MLE based RSSI ranging to enable the MSE to approach the CRLB. The MSE of UWB ranging is:

2
2
E d d d d p PL | d dPL .

(22)

As PLi are mutually independent, we take Equation

(12) and Equation (14) into Equation (22), and get the
MSE of MLE based ranging using RSSI information:

2 2 2 ln 2 10

100 N 2

2 log10 d ln10

2de

2 ln 2 10

200 N 2

log10 d ln 10

MSE
20

CRLB and MSE (m2)

From Equation (13), we know that

d .
(23)

10
d=15
d=10

3
4
5
6
7
8
The Number of Iterations N

10

10

Value
LOS NLOS
1m
1m
47 dB 51 dB
1.7
3.5

The reference distance

The path loss at reference distance
The path loss exponent
The mean value of shadow
1.6
fadings standard deviation
The standard deviation of shadow
0.5
fadings standard deviation

Figure 8. Comparisons between the cramer-rao lower

bound (CRLB) and the mean square error (MSE) of ranging estimations, regarding the number of iterations N.

2.7
0.98

10
Ranging Error (m)

d0
PL0

d=20

d=5

Table 2. Portion of the simulation parameters.

Meaning

15

Therefore, the MSE of estimated distance d is the

function of real distance d and the number of iterations
N.
Based on the data in [7,11,16], we set n1, n2 [-2, 2],
n1n2 [-4, 4] and adopt values of UWB path loss model
for simulations as shown in Table 2.

Notation

CRLB

-1

10

-2

10

N=1
N=5

CRLB and MSE (m2)

10

CRLB,N=5
MSE,N=20

3.5

CRLB,N=20

N=20

-3

MSE,N=5

7
9 11 13
Real Distance (m)

15

17

19

Figure 9. The impact of the number of iteration n to the

ranging errors at different distances.

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
2

8 10 12 14
Real Distance (m)

16

18

20

Figure 7. Comparisons between the cramer-rao lower bound (CRLB) and the mean square error (MSE) of ranging
estimations at different distances.
Copyright 2009 SciRes.

Figure 7 illustrates the relation between d and the

CRLB, and the relation between d and the MSE. On one
hand, it shows that the CRLB and the MSE increase
when d increases, on the other, the MSE of ranging and
the CRLB are always very close. When d is very small,
they even overlap with one another. The more iterations
we have for ranging, the smaller difference between the
CRLB and the MSE (When d = 4m, N = 20, the CRLB is
0.0412m2, the corresponding MSE is 0.0414m2. When d
= 20m, N = 20, the CRLB is 1.0310 m2, the corresponding MSE is 1.0357 m2).
Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

419

UWB-BASED LOCALIZATION IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

45
40
35
30
Y (m)

In Figure 7, we can see that when N = 20, d > 20m, the

MSE of ranging estimation grows higher than 1m2.
Therefore, it is necessary to filter out large d values in
order to achieve higher ranging accuracy.
In the MLE based ranging using the RSSI values, the
number of iterations N is an important parameter. Figure
8 gives the relation between N and the CRLB and the
MSE, respectively. When N increases, the CRLB and the
MSE decrease rapidly. The MSE of ranging approximates the CRLB when N is large enough (e.g. when d =
5m, N = 10, the CRLB is 0.1289 m2, the corresponding
MSE is 0.1300 m2). Accordingly, we validate Equation
(23), and prove the validity of our MLE method.
Figure 9 compares the MLE based ranging errors
when the numbers of iterations N are 1, 5, and 20. Even
if thermal noises and other interferences cause the error
to fluctuate randomly, we can see that higher numbers of
iterations dramatically increase the accuracy of ranging
computations.

20
15
10
55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

X (m)

Figure 12. Localization result of estimation time N=1 (localization error is 1.2547m).

45

10

d=5

40

d=10
d=15

35
30

10

Y (m)

CRLB (m2)

25

25
20

LOS

15

-1

10

NLOS
2

10
55

6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
The Number of Iterations N

Figure 10. The cramer-rao lower bound (CRLB) of ranging

estimations in los (line of sight) and nlos (non-line of sight)
environments.

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

X (m)

Figure 13. Localization result of estimation time N=20 (localization error is 0.2464m).
45

d=16.13 m

40
35
30

Y (m)

Localization Error (m)

1.5

25
20
15

0.5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11121314
MSE (m2)

Figure 11. Realtion between the mean square error (MSE)

of ranging estimation and the localization error.
Copyright 2009 SciRes.

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

X (m)

Figure 14. Localization result of estimation time N= 100

(localization error is 0.0885m).
Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

420

D. WU ET AL.

Figure 10 analyzes the CRLB, which reflects the MSE

of unbiased estimation, in LOS (line of sight) and NLOS
(non-line of sight) environments. When N increases, the
CRLB in LOS and NLOS decrease correspondingly. For
the same distance d situations, the CRLB in NLOS is
even smaller than the CRLB in LOS through our channel
model and ranging method. Therefore, precise ranging
and localization estimation also could be achieved in
NLOS environment. This is especially attractive in coal
mine environments.

7.3. Evaluation of the Localization Algorithms

From the analysis of Cramer-Rao low bound in Equation
(21), the variance of ranging error can be shown in
Equation (23). Similarly, the localization error can be
expressed by the estimated coordinates and the real coordinates as x x 2 y y 2 .
Figure 11 shows the relation between ranging error
and localization error in Equation (19) and Equation (20).
It is obvious that the ranging error and localization error
decrease when N increases. The localization error when
N = 2 is about 2/3 of that when N = 1. When N = 20, we
could get the least localization error, which is 0.3009m.
Secondly, we choose some nodes in Figure 4 to examine the impact of the number of iterations to the accuracy of localization computations as shown in Figure 12,
Figure 13 and Figure 14. The triangle is the target node,
the squares are reference nodes in the communication
radius of the target node, the star is the estimated location of target node and the hollow circles are other nodes.
We set the communication radius in Figure 4 to be 20m,
and the average number of reference nodes in this range
to be K = 5. Therefore, allocating about 40 reference
nodes in the 100m 100m mining area should be enough
to monitor target node. As the location calculation algorithms described in Section 4-B, when Tw = 1s, TRR =
10ms and T = 10ms, we can ensure 20 to 100 rangings
between target node and every reference node. Figure 12,
13, 14 display the special deviation between estimated
location and real location when N = 1, N = 20 and N =
100. Table 3 shows the localization error between the
target node and a reference node that is d = 14.9430m
Table 3. The impact of the number of interations N to the
localization errors when distance d = 14.9430m.
Iteration Number N

Localization Error

N=1

1.2547m

N = 20

0.2464m

N = 50

0.1253m

N = 100

0.0885m

Copyright 2009 SciRes.

away, which shows that the impact of N increments decreases when N is greater than a few dozen.

8. Conclusions
We proposed a group of communication protocols and
localization algorithms for wireless sensor networks in
coal mine environments, namely a new UWB coding
method, called U-BOTH (UWB based on Orthogonal
Variable Spreading Factor and Time Hopping), an
ALOHA-type channel access method and a message exchange protocol to collect location information. Then we
derived the corresponding UWB path loss model in order
to apply the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE)
method to compute the distances to the reference sensors
using the RSSI information, and provided least squares
(LS) method to estimate the coordinate of the moving
target. The performance of U-BOTH communication
system and the localization algorithms are analyzed using communication theories and simulations. Results
show that UBOTH transmission technique can effectively reduce the bit error rate under the path loss model,
and the corresponding ranging and localization algorithms can accurately compute moving object locations
in coal mine environments.

9. Acknowledgment
We would like to express our sincere appreciation to Prof.
Fanzi Zeng, and Prof. Juan Luo for their insightful feedbacks during the preparation of this manuscript, and of
the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.
This work has been generously sponsored in parts by the
National Natural Science Foundation of China under
Grant No. 60673061 and the Raytheon Company under
Grant No. RC-42621.

10. References
[1]

T. A. Alhmiedat and S. H. Yang, A survey: Localization

and tracking mobile targets through wireless sensors
network, In The Eighth Annual PostGraduate Symposium on the Convergence of Telecommunications,
Networking and Broadcasting (PGNET), 2007.

[2]

N. Patwari, A. O. Hero, M. Perkins, N. S. Correal, and R.

J. ODea, Relative location estimation in wireless sensor
networks, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, Vol.
51, pp. 2137, 2003.

[3]

P. Bahl and V. Padmanabhan, RADAR: An in-building

RF-based user location and tracking system, In INFOCOM, 2000.

[4]

K. Whitehouse and D. Culler, Macro-calibration in sensor/actuator networks, In Mobile Networks and

Applications (MONET), Vol. 8, pp. 463472, 2003.
Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences

UWB-BASED LOCALIZATION IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

T. He, J. A. Stankovic, C. Huang, T. Abdelzaher, and B.

M. Blum, Range-free localization schemes for large
scale sensor networks, In Proceedings of the Annual
International Conference on Mobile Computing and
Networking (MOBICOM), pp. 8195, 2003.
IEEE Std 802.15.4a. part 15.4a, Low rate alternative
PHY task group (TG4a) for wireless personal area
networks (WPANs), Technical Report, IEEE, June
2007.
A. F. Molisch, D. Cassioli, and C. -C. Chong, A comprehensive standardized model for ultrawideband
propagation channels, IEEE Transactions on Antennas
and Propagation, Vol. 54, No. 11, pp. 31513166, 2006.
I. Bucaille and A. Tonnerre, MAC layer design for
UWB LDR systems: PULSERS proposal, In 4th
Workshop on Positioning, Navigation and Communication (WPNC), pp. 277283, 2007.
A. Fujii and H. Sekiguchi, Impulse radio UWB positioning system, In IEEE Radio and Wireless Symposium,
pp. 5558, 2007.

[10] L. D. Nardis and M.-G. D. Benedetto, Positioning

accuracy in ultra wide band low data rate networks of
uncoordinated terminals, In IEEE International
Conference on UWB (ICUWB), pp. 611616, 2006.
[11] S. Venkatesh and R. M. Buehrer, Multiple-access design
for Ad Hoc UWB position-location networks, In
Proceedings IEEE Wireless Communications and
Networking Conference (WCNC), Vol. 4, pp. 18661873,
2006.
[12] Y. Wang, Z. Wang, and H. Yu, Simulation study and
probe on UWB wireless communication in underground
coal mine, Journal of China University Of Mining and
Technology (English Edition), Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 296
300, 2006.
[13] M. Z. Win and R. A. Scholtz, Ultra-wide bandwidth
time-hopping spread-spectrum impulse radio for wireless
multiple-access communication, IEEE Transaction on
Communication, Vol. 48, No. 4, pp. 679691, 2000.

Copyright 2009 SciRes.

421

[14] M. G. D. Benedetto, and G. Giancola, Understanding

ultra wide band radio fundamentals, Prentice Hall, New
Jersey, 2004.
[15] T. Gigl and G. J. M. Janssen, Analysis of a UWB indoor
positioning system based on received signal strength, In
4th Workshop on Positioning, Navigation and
Communication (WPNC), pp. 97101, 2007.
[16] S. S. Ghassemzadeh, R. Jana, C. W. Rice, W. Turin, and
V. Tarokh, Measurement and modeling of an ultra-wide
bandwidth indoor channel, IEEE Transaction on
Communication,Vol. 52, No. 10, pp. 17861796, 2004.
[17] F. Li, P. Han, X. Wu, and W. Xu, Research of UWB
signal propagation attenuation model in coal mine,
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 4611, pp.
819828, 2007.
[18] C. Savarese, J.M. Rabaey, and J. Beutel, Locationing in
distributed Ad-Hoc wireless sensor networks, In
Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Acoustics,
Speech, and Signal, Vol. 4, pp. 20372040, 2001.
[19] F. Adachi, M. Sawahashi, and K. Okawa, Tree-structured
generation of orthogonal spreading codes with dierent
lengths for the forward link of DS-CDMA mobile radio,
IEE Electronics Letters, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 2728, January
1997.
[20] H. Cam, Nonblocking OVSF codes and enhancing
network capacity for 3G wireless and beyond systems,
Special Issue of Computer Communications on 3G
Wireless and Beyond for Computer Communications,
Vol. 26, No. 17, pp. 19071917, 2003.
[21] M. Joang and I. T. Lu, Spread spectrum medium access
protocol with collision avoidance in mobile ad-hoc
wireless network, In Proceedings of IEEE Conference
on Computer Communications (INFOCOM), pp. 77683,
New York, NY, USA, March 21-25, 1999.
[22] T. Makansi, Trasmitter-oriented code assignment for
multihop radio net-works, IEEE Transactions on
Communications, Vol. 35, No. 12, pp. 137982,
December 1987.
[23] J. G. proakis, Digital communications: Fourth Edition,
McGraw- Hill, Columbus, 2001

Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences