skip to main content
10.1145/3544216.3544261acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Higher-order modulation for acoustic backscatter communication in metals

Published:22 August 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Backscatter communication enables miniature, batteryless, and low-cost wireless sensors. Since electromagnetic waves are strongly attenuated in several scenarios, backscatter communication in metals via acoustic waves can leverage various applications, e. g., in structural health monitoring. When backscattering, the Tag has little control over the modulation it performs on the carrier wave. Therefore, existing approaches commonly employ differential binary modulation schemes, limiting the achievable data rates. To overcome this limitation, we derive a channel model that accurately describes the modulation in an acoustic backscatter channel---as, e. g., found in steel beams---and leverage it to achieve higher-order load modulation. We present an open-source Reader and Tag pair prototype based on COTS components that we have developed for communication and on-the-fly channel characterization. We explore the influence of various parameters on communication performance on different channels. Moreover, (i) we are the first to demonstrate that acoustic backscatter is feasible in guided-wave channels, covering up to 3 meters, and that (ii) our modulation scheme achieves up to 211% higher data rates than binary modulation schemes, and (iii) provides reliable communication through channel coding.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Sayed Saad Afzal, Reza Ghaffarivardavagh, Waleed Akbar, Osvy Rodriguez, and Fadel Adib. 2020. Enabling Higher-Order Modulation for Underwater Backscatter Communication. In Global Oceans 2020: Singapore-US Gulf Coast. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. J. M. Algueta-Migue, J. R. Garcí a Oya, A. J. LÓpez-Martin, C. A. De La Cruz Blas, F. Muñoz Chavero, and E. Hidalgo-Fort. 2019. Low-Power Ultrasonic Front-End for Cargo Container Monitoring. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement (2019), 1--1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahmed Allam. 2021. Acoustic Power Transfer Leveraging Piezoelectricity and Metamaterials. Ph.D. Dissertation. Georgia Institute of Technology. https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/65095Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jonathan D. Ashdown, Kyle R. Wilt, Tristan J. Lawry, Gary J. Saulnier, David A. Shoudy, Henry A. Scarton, and Andrew J. Gavens. 2013. A full-duplex ultrasonic through-wall communication and power delivery system. IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control 60, 3 (March 2013), 587--595.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. C. Bacher, P. Palensky, and S. Mahlknecht. 2005. Low cost data transmission via metallic solids for sensor networking. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Emerging Technologies, 2005. 193--198.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. J. Bok and H. Ryu. 2012. Mitigation of multipath in steel wall channel of ultrasonic communication system. In 2012 International Conference on ICT Convergence (ICTC). 449--453.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Michael T Cunningham, Gary J Saulnier, Robert Chase, Edward M Curt, Kyle R Wilt, Francisco J Maldonado, Stephen Oonk, and Henry A Scarton. 2016. Low-rate ultrasonic communications and power delivery for sensor applications. In MILCOM 2016-2016 IEEE Military Communications Conference. IEEE, 91--96.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Falko Dressler and Stefan Fischer. 2015. Connecting in-body nano communication with body area networks: Challenges and opportunities of the Internet of Nano Things. Nano Communication Networks 6, 2 (2015), 29--38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Reza Ghaffarivardavagh, Sayed Saad Afzal, Osvy Rodriguez, and Fadel Adib. 2020. Ultra-Wideband Underwater Backscatter via Piezoelectric Metamaterials (SIGCOMM '20). ACM, 722--734.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Mohammad Meraj Ghanbari and Rikky Muller. 2020. Optimizing Volumetric Efficiency and Backscatter Communication in Biosensing Ultrasonic Implants. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Circuits and Systems 14, 6 (Dec. 2020), 1381--1392. Conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Circuits and Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. D. J. Graham, J. A. Neasham, and B. S. Sharif. 2011. Investigation of Methods for Data Communication and Power Delivery Through Metals. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 58, 10 (Oct. 2011), 4972--4980.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Raffaele Guida, Neil Dave, Francesco Restuccia, Emrecan Demirors, and Tommaso Melodia. 2019. U-Verse: a miniaturized platform for end-to-end closed-loop implantable internet of medical things systems. In Proceedings of the 17th Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems. 311--323.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Alexander Heifetz, Jafar Saniie, Xin Huang, Boyang Wang, Dmitry Shribak, Eugene R Koehl, Sasan Bakhtiari, and Richard B Vilim. 2019. Final Report for Transmission of Information by Acoustic Communication Along Metal Pathways in Nuclear Facilities. Technical Report. Argonne National Lab.(ANL), Argonne, IL (United States).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Michael Helmling, Stefan Scholl, Florian Gensheimer, Tobias Dietz, Kira Kraft, Stefan Ruzika, and Norbert Wehn. 2019. Database of Channel Codes and ML Simulation Results. www.uni-kl.de/channel-codes. (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Thomas Hosman, Mark Yeary, John K Antonio, and Brent Hobbs. 2010. Multi-tone FSK for ultrasonic communication. In 2010 IEEE Instrumentation & Measurement Technology Conference Proceedings. IEEE, 1424--1429.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. X. Huang, J. Saniie, S. Bakhtiari, and A. Heifetz. 2018. Applying EMAT for Ultrasonic Communication Through Steel Plates and Pipes. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Electro/Information Technology (EIT). 0379--0383.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Junsu Jang and Fadel Adib. 2019. Underwater backscatter networking. In Proceedings of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. 187--199.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Marina Jordão, Ricardo Correia, and Nuno Borges Carvalho. 2019. Characterisation and implementation of high-order backscatter modulation for IoT applications. IET Microwaves, Antennas & Propagation 13, 15 (2019), 2636--2640.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. ME Kiziroglou, DE Boyle, SW Wright, and EM Yeatman. 2017. Acoustic power delivery to pipeline monitoring wireless sensors. Ultrasonics 77 (2017), 54--60.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. M. Kluge, Th. Becker, J. Schalk, and T. Otterpohl. 2008. Remote acoustic powering and data transmission for sensors inside of conductive envelopes. In 2008 IEEE SENSORS. 41--44. ISSN: 1930-0395.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Hartmudt Koeppe, Sven Thamm, Thomas Trettin, Ulrike Steinmann, and Joerg Auge. 2014. A wireless supplied multi-sensor-system for spatial resolved inline process analysis. In Sensors and Measuring Systems 2014; 17. ITG/GMA Symposium. 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Yao-Hong Liu, Christian Bachmann, Xiaoyan Wang, Yan Zhang, Ao Ba, Benjamin Busze, Ming Ding, Pieter Harpe, Gert-Jan van Schaik, Georgios Selimis, Hans Giesen, Jordy Gloudemans, Adnane Sbai, Li Huang, Hiromu Kato, Guido Dolmans, Kathleen Philips, and Harmke de Groot. 2015. 13.2 A 3.7mW-RX 4.4mW-TX fully integrated Bluetooth Low-Energy/IEEE802.15.4/proprietary SoC with an ADPLL-based fast frequency offset compensation in 40nm CMOS. In 2015 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference - (ISSCC) Digest of Technical Papers. 1--3. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Peter Oppermann and Christian Renner. 2019. Low-Power Ultrasonic Wake-Up and Communication through Structural Elements. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Energy Harvesting & Energy-Neutral Sensing Systems (ENSsys'19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Enrico Paolini and Mark Flanagan. 2014. Low-Density Parity-Check Code Constructions. In Channel Coding, David Declerq, Marc Fossorier, and Ezio Biglieri (Eds.). Academic Press, Oxford, 141--209.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Dominique Paret. 2009. RFID at ultra and super high frequencies. Wiley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Bernd-Christian Renner, Jan Heitmann, and Fabian Steinmetz. 2020. ahoi: Inexpensive, Low-power Communication and Localization for Underwater Sensor Networks and μAUVs. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks (TOSN) 16, 2 (2020), 1--46.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Richard Primerano, Moshe Kam, and Kapil Dandekar. 2009. High bit rate ultrasonic communication through metal channels. In 2009 43rd Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems. 902--906.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Sebastian Roa-Prada, Henry A. Scarton, Gary J. Saulnier, David A. Shoudy, Jonathan D. Ashdown, Pankaj K. Das, and Andrew J. Gavens. 2013. An Ultrasonic Through-Wall Communication (UTWC) System Model. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics 135, 1 (02 2013).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. M. G. L. Roes. 2015. Exploring the potential of acoustic energy transfer. Ph.D. Dissertation. TU Eindhoven. https://research.tue.nl/en/publications/exploring-the-potential-of-acoustic-energy-transferGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. G. J. Saulnier, H. A. Scarton, A. J. Gavens, D. A. Shoudy, S. Bard, S. Roa-Prada, T. L. Murphy, M. Wetzel, and P. Das. 2006. Through-Wall Communicatin of Low-Rate Digital Data Using Ultrasound. Technical Report LM-06K102. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (KAPL), Niskayuna, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. D. A. Shoudy, G. J. Saulnier, H. A. Scarton, P. K. Das, S. Roa-Prada, J. D. Ashdown, and A. J. Gavens. 2007. P3F-5 An Ultrasonic Through-Wall Communication System with Power Harvesting. In 2007 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium Proceedings. 1848--1853.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhongqing Su. 2009. Identification of Damage Using Lamb Waves. Springer London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Stewart J. Thomas and Matthew S. Reynolds. 2012. A 96 Mbit/sec, 15.5 pJ/bit 16-QAM modulator for UHF backscatter communication. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on RFID (RFID). 185--190.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Victor Farm-Guoo Tseng, Sarah S. Bedair, and Nathan Lazarus. 2018. Acoustic Power Transfer and Communication With a Wireless Sensor Embedded Within Metal. IEEE Sensors Journal 18, 13 (July 2018), 5550--5558. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Victor Farm-Guoo Tseng, Sarah S. Bedair, Joshua J. Radice, Trevon E. Drummond, and Nathan Lazarus. 2020. Ultrasonic Lamb Waves for Wireless Power Transfer. IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control 67, 3 (March 2020), 664--670. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. S. Yang and A. C. Singer. 2016. Energy Efficient Ultrasonic Communication on Steel Pipes. In 2016 IEEE International Workshop on Signal Processing Systems (SiPS). 297--302.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Lonzhi Yuan, Can Xiong, Si Chen, and Wei Gong. 2021. Embracing Self-Powered Wireless Wearables for Smart Healthcare. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom). 1--7. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Jianing Zhang, Ziying Yu, Hengxu Yang, Ming Wu, and Jun Yang. 2015. Wireless communication using ultrasound through metal barriers: Experiment and analysis. In 2015 10th International Conference on Information, Communications and Signal Processing (ICICS). 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Higher-order modulation for acoustic backscatter communication in metals

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        SIGCOMM '22: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2022 Conference
        August 2022
        858 pages
        ISBN:9781450394208
        DOI:10.1145/3544216

        Copyright © 2022 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 22 August 2022

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate554of3,547submissions,16%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader