JOURNAL OF NANO- AND ELECTRONIC PHYSICS ЖУРНАЛ НАНО- ТА ЕЛЕКТРОННОЇ ФІЗИКИ

Vol. 15 No 3, 03021(6pp) (2023) Том 15 № 3, 03021(6cc) (2023)

Comparative Study of the Performance of Different Modulations in FSO

Communication over a Turbulent Channel with Pointing Error

A. Fakchich1,*, M. Bouhadda2,†, R. El Alami1, F.M. Abbou3, A. Essahlaoui2, M. El Ghzaoui1, N.R. Medikondu4

1 Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdellah University, Faculty of Sciences Dhar El Mehraz, LESSI, BP 1796, Fes-Atlas, Morocco
2 Engineering Sciences Laboratory (LSI), Multidisciplinary Faculty, Taza,

Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdellah University, Morocco

3 School of Sciences and Engineering, Al Akhawyen University, Ifrane, Morocco
4 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Vaddeswaram,

Andhra Pradesh, India

(Received 20 May 2023; revised manuscript received 18 June 2023; published online 30 June 2023)

Free Space Optical (FSO) communication is a method of transmitting data using modulated light waves
through free space, such as air or vacuum, instead of using traditional wired or fiber-optic cables. FSO sys-
tems typically use lasers or light-emitting diodes (LEDs) as light sources to transmit data, and photodiodes
or other light detectors to receive the data. In this paper, we investigate the error performance of a Free
Space Optical system using various modulation techniques under different intensity fluctuation conditions.
Our analysis takes into account the combined effects of atmospheric turbulence-induced fading and misa-
lignment fading on the propagating signal. We derive novel closed-form expressions for the statistics of the
random attenuation of the propagation channel for each modulation scheme used. Additionally, we perform
a comparative study of bit-error rate (BER) performance for all modulation techniques considered in this
work. We present numerical results to evaluate the error performance of all modulation schemes used in
FSO systems with the presence of atmospheric turbulence and/or misalignment. Furthermore, we compare
the OOK, PPM, DPSK, and BSPK modulation techniques to determine the best modulation that achieves
the minimum BER for a given signal-to-noise ratio value equal to 30 dB in different scenarios.

Keywords: Free-Space Optics (FSO), OOK, BPSK, DPSK, PPM, Atmospheric turbulence, Pointing error.

DOI: 10.21272/jnep.15(3).03021 PACS number: 84.40.Ba

1. INTRODUCTION degrades the performance of FSO communication sys-

tems by increasing the bit error rate [8].
The number of mobile users has been rising quickly, There are various modulation techniques that can be
and the switch to the 5G cellular network is predicted to used in optical wireless communication. These tech-
cause traffic to increase by a factor of seven [1], and the niques are often compared in terms of the average re-
evolution of the idea of the Internet of Things [2], which ceived optical power required to achieve a desired bit er-
is one of the most well-known names that has recently ror rate (BER) at a specific data rate. The On-Off Keying
reached new heights and established a standard IoT [3]. (OOK) is frequently regarded as the simplest and most
A communication system can increase the transmitted widely applied technique. It does, however, have several
data by using free space optics (FSO), which can enable drawbacks, particularly when pointing errors and at-
high-speed, high-bandwidth over short distances, often mospheric turbulence are present. In order to enhance
up several kilometers. This communication technology system performance, OOK also needs an adjustable
uses optical signals to transmit data through atmosphere threshold, which might complicate system design and in-
between two points. It is an alternative to traditional wire- troduce new requirements [9]. On the other hand, the
less technologies such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth. FSO operates phase modulation techniques BPSK and DPSK offer bet-
in the infrared and visible light spectrum and requires a ter performance compared to OOK in the presence of tur-
line-of-sight (LOS) between the transmitter and receiver. bulence and pointing error. BPSK is the simplest form of
FSO communication can be used to establish high-speed phase shift keying (PSK), and it is the most robust of all
links between bas station in 5G cellular networks [4]. Ac- PSKs as it requires the highest level of noise or distortion
cording to various predictions, the number of connected to disrupt its signal [10]. DPSK refers to a modulation
devices could reach between 20 and 30 billion by 2025, technique that alters the phase of the carrier signal to
with some estimates even higher [5]. The integration of 5G convey data, and it can help alleviate the impact of scin-
features in IoT using FSO links can enhance the coverage tillation to some degree [11].
area and performance of IoT [6]. This paper is organized as; after this introduction,
The quality and reliability of FSO communication the rest of this document is organized as follows: In Sec-
systems can be significantly degraded by atmospheric tion two, we present the channel model. In Section three,
turbulence, which results in a loss of power. This issue is we describe a mathematical model of atmospheric turbu-
more present when there is a pointing error and the lence. In Section four, we present the pointing error
transmitter and receiver are far apart [7]. This impair- model. In Section five, we derive the statistical model of
ment, due to atmospheric turbulence and misalignment,

* [email protected]
† [email protected]

2077-6772/2023/15(3)03021(6) 03021-1  2023 Sumy State University

A. FAKCHICH, M. BOUHADDA, R. EL ALAMI, ET AL. J. NANO- ELECTRON. PHYS. 15, 03021 (2023)

combined turbulence and pointing error. In Section six, placement 𝛼 of the receiver from its origin, can be ap-
we derive the mathematical model of the bit error rate proximated by[15]:
for each modulation technique used in this work. In Sec-
2𝛼 2
tion seven, we analyze and discuss the simulated results. ℎ𝑝 (𝛼) = 𝐴0 𝑒𝑥𝑝 (− ) (5)
Finally, we conclude this paper in the eighth section. 𝑤𝑧2𝑒𝑞

Where 𝑤𝑧2𝑒𝑞 = 𝑤𝑧2 √𝜋𝑒𝑟𝑓(𝜐)/2𝜐𝑒𝑥𝑝(−𝜐 2 ), 𝜐 = √𝜋𝑟/√2𝑤𝑧 ,

2. CHANNEL MODEL
A0=[𝑒𝑟𝑓 (𝜐)]2 , erf(.) is the error function. Considering
The transmitted signal propagates in the atmos- that the elevation and horizontal displacement are iden-
pheric channel. The channel model can be modeled tical and independent Gaussian processes, the radial dis-
as[12] : placement α follows the Rayleigh distribution, and the
probability density of ℎ𝑝 is expressed as:
𝑦 = 𝑥𝜂ℎ + 𝑛 (1)
where 𝑦 is the received signal, 𝑥 is the transmitted sig- 𝛾2 𝛾2 −1
𝑓ℎ𝑝 ((ℎ𝑝 ) =) = ℎ𝑝 0 ≤ ℎ𝑝 ≤ 𝐴 0 (1)
nal, 𝜂 is the effective photoelectric conversion ratio, ℎ is 𝛾2
𝐴0
the received optical irradiance, and 𝑛 is the additive
𝑤𝑧𝑒𝑞
white Gaussian noise with zero mean. Where 𝛾 = represents the ratio of the equivalent
2𝜎𝑠
beam radius at the receiver to the jitter variance at the
3. ATMOSPHERIC TURBULENCE
receiver.
Scintillation effects are caused by atmospheric turbu-
lence, and they can be described by many statistical mod- 5. COMBINED ATTENUATION STATISTIC
els. The log normal distribution is widely accepted for low
Using the previous probability densities for turbu-
turbulence [13]. The Gamma-Gamma probability density
lence and misalignment, the probability density of
function under certain approximations can describe the
ℎ = ℎ𝑙 ℎ𝑎 ℎ𝑝 can be expressed in terms of [15]:
three regimes of turbulence namely weak, moderate and
strong turbulence. In this work we have chosen the
𝑓ℎ (ℎ) = ∫ 𝑓ℎ⁄ (ℎ⁄ℎ ) 𝑓ℎ𝑎 (ℎ𝑎 )𝑑ℎ𝑎 (2)
gamma-gamma turbulence model because it effectively ℎ𝑎 𝑎
describes the strength of any atmospheric turbulence. Its ℎ
probability density can be well modeled as [14]: Where 𝑓ℎ⁄ ( ) is the conditional probability given that
ℎ𝑎 ℎ𝑎
𝛼+𝛽 the atmospheric communication channel is turbulent [14].
2(𝛼𝛽) 2 𝛼+𝛽 −1
𝑓ℎ𝑎 (ℎ𝑎 ) = ℎ 2 𝐾𝛼−𝛽 (2√𝛼𝛽ℎ𝑎 ) ℎ𝑎 (2) 𝛾 2 𝛼𝛽 ℎ 𝛾2
ℾ(𝛼)ℾ(𝛽) 𝑎 𝑓ℎ (ℎ) = 𝐺 3,0 [𝛼𝛽 | ] (3)
>0 𝐴0 ℎ𝑙 ℾ(𝛼)ℾ(𝛽) 1,3 𝐴0 ℎ𝑙 𝛾 2 − 1, 𝛼 − 1, 𝛽 − 1

With ℎ𝑎 is the normalized signal intensity, ℾ(. ) is the

gamma function, 𝐾𝛼−𝛽 is the modified Bessel function of 6. CHANNEL CHARACTERIZATION
second order, and α, β are the parameters that describe 6.1 Bit Error Rate of Modulations
the strength of the atmospheric turbulence with 𝛼 and 𝛽
can be directly related to atmospheric conditions their The conditional BER values for different modulation
mathematical expressions are: techniques are given below [16]:
−1
1 𝜂 2 ℎ2
0.49𝜎𝑅2 𝑃(𝑒|ℎ)𝑅𝑍−𝑂𝑂𝐾 =
2
𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑐 (√( ) )
𝑁0 4
(4)
𝛼 = (𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( ) − 1) (3)
12/5 7/6 1 𝜂 2 ℎ2
(1 + 1.11𝜎𝑅 ) 𝑃(𝑒|ℎ)𝑁𝑅𝑍−𝑂𝑂𝐾 = 𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑐 (√( ) ) (5)
2 𝑁0 8
−1

0.51𝜎𝑅2 𝑃(𝑒|ℎ)𝐵𝑃𝑆𝐾 =
1
𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑐 (√
ƞ𝐴
ℎ) (6)
𝛽 = (𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( 5/6
) − 1) (4) 2 2𝑞𝐵
12/5
(1 + 0.69𝜎𝑅 ) 1 𝜂𝑒 𝐴𝑇𝑠
𝑃(𝑒|ℎ)𝐷𝑃𝑆𝐾 =
2
𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑐 (√
2ƕ𝑃 𝑣
ℎ) (7)
1 𝜂 2 ℎ2 𝑙𝑛(𝐿)
Where 𝜎𝑅2 is a parameter of the Rytov variance, it is a 𝑃(𝑒|ℎ)𝑃𝑃𝑀 = 𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑐 (√( ) 𝐿 ) (8)
2 𝑁0 8 𝑙𝑛(2)
measure of the strength of turbulence fluctuations.

4. POINTING ERROR MODEL 6.2 Atmospheric Turbulence Effect Only

The probability density of ℎ𝑝 can be modeled using In the case that only atmospheric turbulence occurs,
then ℎ = ℎ𝑎 > 0. Employing equation 21 [18], the average
the assumptions and methodology described in refer-
BER will be given by:
ence[15]. Specifically, if we assume a Gaussian optical ∞
(9)
beam of width 𝑤𝑧 on the plane of the receiver having a 𝑃(𝑒) = ∫ 𝑃(𝑒|ℎ𝑎 )𝑓ℎ𝑎 (ℎ𝑎 )𝑑ℎ𝑎
circular aperture of radius r, and away from the trans- 0
mitter by a distance z. The fraction of the collected 1−𝛼 2−𝛼 1−𝛽 2−𝛽
, , , ,1
power, due to geometric propagation with radial dis- 2,4 2 2 2 2
= 𝑀𝐺5,2 [𝐵| 1 ]
0,
2

03021-2
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE PERFORMANCE OF DIFFERENT MODULATIONS…J. NANO- ELECTRON. PHYS. 15, 03021 (2023)

Where 𝑀 =
2𝛼+𝛽−3
and B is expressed as = (𝛼𝛽)2 ,
4𝜇 7. SIMULATION RESULTS
3
𝜋2 𝛤(𝛼)𝛤(𝛽)
2𝜇 𝐿ln(𝐿)𝜇 We consider different values of the Rytov variance
𝐵 = (𝛼𝛽)2 and 𝐵 = (𝛼𝛽)2 for RZ-OOK, NRZ-OOK and
ln(2) parameter to describe the strength of atmospheric tur-
PPM respectively. bulence. Additionally, we vary the normalized pulse
Employing equation 07.34.21.0011.01[19], the aver- 𝑊
width 𝑧 and take discrete values of the normalized jitter
age BER will be given by: 𝑟
variance 𝜎𝑠 /𝑟 to account for the impact of pointing error.
The evolution of average BER versus signal to noise ratio
𝑃(𝑒)BPSK
(10) is presented in Fig.1, where we only assume the effect of
1 2,2 𝜇
1 − 𝛼, 1 − 𝛽, 1
= 𝐺3,2 [ | ] moderate atmospheric turbulence (𝜎𝑅 2 = 1). It is evident
1
2√𝜋𝛤(𝛼)𝛤(𝛽) 𝛼𝛽 0, that the average Bit Error Rate (BER) decreases as the
2
Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) increases for all modulation
𝑃(𝑒)DPSK techniques. The curves in the figure show that BPSK
(11) modulation performs the best among them. With the
1 𝜇 1 − 𝛼, 1 − 𝛽, 1
= 2,2
𝐺3,2 [ | 1 ] most performant modulation, it is possible to achieve a
2√𝜋𝛤(𝛼)𝛤(𝛽) 2𝛼𝛽 0, reference BER of 10 – 9 when the signal-to-noise ratio
2
(SNR) is 37 dB.
6.3 Pointing Error Effect Only

In the case where only pointing error occurs, after-

wards 0 ≤ ℎ = ℎ𝑝 ≤ 𝐴0 . Using equation 26 [18], the aver-
age BER is given by:
𝐴0 𝛾2
1− ,1
2
𝑃(𝑒) = ∫ 𝑃(𝑒|ℎ𝑝 ) 𝑓ℎ𝑝 (ℎ𝑝 ) 𝑑ℎ𝑝 = 2,1
𝐾𝐺2,3 [𝐵| 1 𝛾2] (12)
0, , −
0 2 2

𝛾2 +2 𝛾2 +2
Where B is expressed as 𝐵 = 𝜇, 𝐵 = 𝜇 and
4𝛾2 8𝛾2
𝛾2 +2 𝑙𝑛(𝐿) 𝛾2
𝐵=( 𝜇) 𝐿 with 𝐾 = for RZ-OOK, NRZ-OOK
16𝛾2 𝑙𝑛(2) 4√𝜋
𝛾2 +2 𝛾2 +2
and PPM respectively. Also 𝐵 = 𝜇 𝐵= 𝜇 with
𝛾2 2𝛾2
𝛾2
𝐾= for BPSK and DPSK respectively.
2√𝜋
Fig. 1 – Average bit error rate (BER) versus SNR for a turbulent
channel only
6.4 Combined Attenuation

The bit error rate of the FSO link for the combination
of the two effects will be expressed as:
∞

𝑃(𝑒) = ∫ 𝑃(𝑒|ℎ)𝑓ℎ (ℎ)𝑑ℎ (13)

0

We use equation 21[18]

𝑃(𝑒)
1 − γ2 2 − γ2 1 − α 2 − α 1 − β 2 − β
, , , , , ,1
2,6 2 2 2 2 2 2
= AG7,4 [𝐶| 1 −γ2 1 − γ2 ] (14)
0, , ,
2 2 2
Fig. 2 – Average bit error rate (BER) versus SNR for a turbulent
4 μ(γ2 +2) 2 μ(γ2 +2) channel only
Where C is expressed as = |, 𝐶= and 𝐶 =
γ2 (αβ)2 γ2 (αβ)2
μL
ln(L) 2
(γ +2) The Fig. 2 depicts the average BER versus SNR un-
ln(2)
for RZ-OOK, NRZ-OOK and PPM respec- der the effect of strong atmospheric turbulence
γ2 (αβ)2
2α+β−4 γ2 (𝜎𝑅 2 = 2,5). Based on the curves shown in Fig. 2, it is
tively, and 𝐴 = .
3
π2 Γ(α)Γ(β) evident that the impact of strong turbulence is substan-
tial. With the best modulation BPSK we achieve a BER
We use equation [20] of 10 – 5 at SNR  37 dB. Comparing the results in Fig. 2
−𝛾2 + 1, −𝛼 + 1, −𝛽 + 1,1 with those in Fig. 1, we can see that strong turbulence
𝑃(𝑒) = 𝐸𝐺2,3
4,3 [𝐷| 1 ] (15) causes severe signal fading and bit error rate (BER) deg-
0, , −𝛾2
2 radation, which can render the Free Space Optical (FSO)
𝜇(𝛾2 +1) 𝜇(𝛾2 +1) system practically unusable.
Where D is expressed as 𝐷 = and 𝐷 = for,
𝛾2 𝛼𝛽 2𝛾2 𝛼𝛽 In addition to evaluating the performance of the FSO
𝛾2
BPSK and DPSK respectively, and 𝐸 = . system, we specifically focus on analyzing the impact of
√𝜋𝛤(𝛼)𝛤(𝛽)

03021-3
A. FAKCHICH, M. BOUHADDA, R. EL ALAMI, ET AL. J. NANO- ELECTRON. PHYS. 15, 03021 (2023)
𝜎𝑠 𝜎
misalignment fading while assuming the absence of tur- = 2.5 and 𝑠 = 4.5, respectively. This indicates that the
𝑟 𝑟
bulence effects and a fixed SNR of 30 dB. We assume that transmission over an FSO link in these conditions may
𝑊
the normalized beamwidth, denoted by 𝑧 , can take val- have a high error rate, and the receiver may face diffi-
𝑟
ues from 1 to 6. The evolution of BER versus beamwidth culty in successfully decoding the transmitted bit.
𝜎 𝜎
for two values of normalized jitter. 𝑠 = 2,5 and 𝑠 = 4,5,
𝑟 𝑟
are presented in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, respectively.

Fig. 5 – BER versus normalized beamwidth

Fig. 3 – BER versus normalized beamwidth assuming pointing

error effects only

Fig. 6 – BER versus normalized beamwidth

Fig. 4 – BER versus normalized beamwidth assuming pointing

error effects only

According to the curves presented in two figures, we

observe that the average BER increase as the beamwidth
rises. We note that the BER is very important when the
normalized jitter increases. For BPSK modulation, the
values of BER are 10 – 5 and 10 – 2 for normalized jitter
𝜎𝑠 𝑊
= 2,5 and beamwith 𝑧 = 5,7, and normalized jitter
𝑟 𝑟
𝜎𝑠 𝑊𝑧
= 4,5 and beamwith = 5,7, respectively. The two fig-
𝑟 𝑟
ures show that the BPSK modulation exhibits better per-
formance than other modulations.
Our next step is to evaluate the impact of the com-
bined effects of atmospheric turbulence and pointing Fig.7- BER versus normalized beamwidth
error. We maintain a constant value of SNR at 30 dB and
Finally, we evaluate the FSO system using the mod-
vary the beamwidth from 1 to 6. The Fig.5 and Fig.6 de-
ulation schemes of OOK, PPM, DBSK, and BPSK under
pict the average BER in terms of normalized beamwidth
strong turbulence conditions with two values of normal-
for moderate turbulence 𝜎𝑅2 = 1 and normalized jitter 𝜎 𝜎
𝜎 ized jitter, 𝑠 = 2,5 and 𝑠 = 4.5, while maintaining a con-
equal to 𝑠 = 2.5. Based on the curves in those figures, we 𝑟 𝑟
𝑟
stant SNR of 30 dB.
see that the combined atmospheric effect and misalign-
The curves in Fig.7 and Fig.8 represent the evolution
ment degrade drastically the system performance.
of BER versus normalized beamwidth. We can observe
For the best BPSK modulation and moderate turbu-
that the BER is significant and increases rapidly as the
lence, the minimum BER values are noted to be approxi-
normalized jitter increases. The curves in the two figures
mately 10 – 5 and 10 – 2 for normalized jitter equal to

03021-4
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE PERFORMANCE OF DIFFERENT MODULATIONS…J. NANO- ELECTRON. PHYS. 15, 03021 (2023)

show, as with the previous results, that the minimum 8. CONCLUSIONS

BER achieved by the optimal modulation scheme is
much lower than the reference BER of 10-9. We investigated the bit error rate (BER) performance
of an FSO communication system using different modu-
lation schemes. We derived BER expressions for each
modulation scheme, taking into account the effects of at-
mospheric turbulence and pointing errors. The simula-
tion results demonstrate that the bit error rate (BER)
performance is influenced by numerous factors that are
related to atmospheric turbulence and misalignment.
These factors can include the strength of turbulence, nor-
malized jitter, normalized beamwidth, and the transmit-
ted power that affects the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR).
The results show that the turbulence and point-ing error
increase drastically the BER which render the FSO sys-
tem practically unusable. By taking into ac-count the fac-
tors mentioned above, along with the possible applica-
tion of techniques such as error control coding and trans-
mit-receive diversity to enhance BER performance, this
study may serve as a basis for fur-ther exploration of un-
Fig. 8 – BER versus normalized beamwidth
resolved areas in the future.
It is noteworthy that the performance of the FSO sys-
tem degrades significantly under strong turbulence and
pointing errors.

REFERENCES
1. Ericsson Mobility Report November 2022 (2022). 11. T.Y. Elganimi, Jordan Conf. Appl. Electr. Eng. Comput.
2. J. Bradley, C. Reberger, A. Dixit, V. Gupta, J. Macaulay, In- Technol. AEECT 2013 (2013).
ternet of Everything (IoE): Top 10 Insights from Cisco’s IoE 12. B. Patnaik, P.K. Sahu, Int. J. Signal Imaging Syst. Eng. 6,
Value at Stake Analysis for the Public Sector. Economic 3 (2013).
Analysis, 1 (2013). 13. O.O. Kolawole, T.J.O. Afullo, M. Mosalaosi, Photonics 9, 446
3. L.J.S. Kumar, P. Krishnan, B. Shreya, M.S. Sudhakar, (2022).
Optik 252, 168430 (2022). 14. H.G. Sandalidis, T.A. Tsiftsis, G.K. Karagiannidis, J. Light.
4. O. Aboelala, I.E. Lee, G.C. Chung, Entropy 24, 1573 (2022). Technol. 27, 4440 (2009).
5. D.K. Trends, Growth Enabler. 1 (2017). 15. A.A. Farid, S. Hranilovic, J. Light. Technol. 25, 1702 (2007).
6. V. Dhasarathan, M. Singh, J. Malhotra, Wireless Netw. 26, 16. W. Lim, J. Opt. Soc. Korea 19, 237 (2015).
2403 (2020). 17. H. Zhang, H. Li, C. Hao, Int. J. Simul. Syst. Sci. Technol.
7. T. Song, M.W. Wu, P.Y. Kam, IEEE Commun. Lett. 22, 292 17, 37 (2016).
(2018). 18. V.S. Adamchik, O.I. Marichev, Proc. Int. Conf. Symbolic and
8. M. Safari, S. Member, M. Uysal, S. Member, IEEE Trans. Algebraic Computation (Tokyo, Japan: 1990).
Wireless Commun. 7, 5441 (2008). 19. G-function, M.: http://functions.wolfram.com/PDF/Mei-
9. T. Youssef Elganimi, Int. J. Comput. Appl. 79, 22 (2013). jerG.pdf. 2, 1–163.
10. J. Li, J.Q. Liu, D.P. Taylor, IEEE Trans. Commun. 55, 1598 20. A.P. Prudnikov, Yu.A. Brychkov, O.I. Marichev, Integrals
(2007). and Series Vol. 3, More Special Functions (1990).

Порівняльне дослідження ефективності різних модуляцій у FSO: зв'язок по турбулент-

ному каналу з помилкою вказівки

A. Fakchich1, M. Bouhadda2, R. El Alami1, F.M. Abbou3, A. Essahlaoui2, M. El Ghzaoui1, N.R. Medikondu4

1 Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdellah University, Faculty of Sciences Dhar El Mehraz, LESSI, BP 1796, Fes-Atlas,
Morocco
2 Engineering Sciences Laboratory (LSI), Multidisciplinary Faculty, Taza,

Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdellah University, Morocco

3 School of Sciences and Engineering, Al Akhawyen University, Ifrane, Morocco
4 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Vaddeswaram,

Andhra Pradesh, India

03021-5
A. FAKCHICH, M. BOUHADDA, R. EL ALAMI, ET AL. J. NANO- ELECTRON. PHYS. 15, 03021 (2023)

Оптичний зв’язок у вільному просторі (FSO) — це метод передачі даних за допомогою модульованих
світлових хвиль через вільний простір, наприклад, повітря чи вакуум, замість використання традицій-
них дротових або волоконно-оптичних кабелів. У системах FSO зазвичай використовують лазери або
світлодіоди як джерела світла для передачі даних, а також фотодіоди або інші детектори світла для
отримання даних. У статті досліджена ефективність помилок оптичної системи вільного простору з ви-
користанням різних методів модуляції за різних умов коливання інтенсивності. Аналіз, проведений в
роботі, враховує комбінований вплив завмирання, спричиненого атмосферною турбулентністю, і за-
вмирання зміщення на сигнал, що поширюється. Були отримані нові співвіношення закритої форми
для статистики випадкового загасання каналу розповсюдження для кожної використаної схеми моду-
ляції. Крім того, проведено порівняльне дослідження ефективності частоти бітових помилок (BER) для
всіх методів модуляції. Наведені чисельні результати для оцінки ефективності похибок усіх схем моду-
ляції, що використовуються в системах FSO з наявністю атмосферної турбулентності та/або неузгодже-
ності. Крім того, ми порівнюємо методи модуляції OOK, PPM, DPSK і BSPK, щоб визначити найкращу
модуляцію, яка забезпечує мінімальний BER для заданого значення співвідношення сигнал/шум, що
дорівнює 30 дБ у різних сценаріях.

Ключові слова: Оптика вільного простору (FSO), Методи модуляції: OOK, BPSK, DPSK, PPM, Атмос-
ферна турбулентність, Помилка наведення.

03021-6