1

Echo-Cancellation for Ultrasonic Data Transmission through a Metal Channel

Richard Primerano, Kevin Wanuga, Joseph Dorn, Moshe Kam and Kapil Dandekar Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Drexel University, Philadelphia PA 215 895-1740 rap34@drexel.edu
use ultrasonic data repeaters to move data across metallic barriers without mechanical penetration. One of the challenges associated with the use of through the wall ultrasonic devices is the presence of echoes from transmitted pulses at high data rates. We describe a method for echo cancellation to partially overcome this limitation and allow for considerable increase (from 50kbps to 1 Mbps) in transmit bit rate. Related research on propagation of ultrasonic signal through metallic barriers includes power transmission through metal walls using piezoelectric transducers [1], electromechanical network models for acoustic through-wall signal transmission [2], and the development of ultrasonic data communication systems [3]. The echo problem encountered in our application bears some similarity to multipath phenomena observed in radio frequency communications. These effects are typically addressed by equalization or RAKE filtering [10] performed at the output of the channel. Here we provide an alternative for echocancellation in ultrasonic communication applications by predistorting the transmitted signal to compensate for the interference introduced by the bulkhead. II. EXPERIMENTAL TESTBED

Abstract The process control industry has shown great interest in implementation of low cost, low power wireless sensor networks. Such networks are much easier to deploy and reconfigure compared to wired alternatives. In this paper, we describe the use of radio-frequency (RF) based sensor networks in sensing and control applications on naval vessels. In this environment, metal bulkheads (which divide the ship into watertight compartments) and other metallic obstacles can lead to unreliable network connectivity. We propose to address the challenge by augmenting the RF network with ultrasonic data repeaters. The repeaters are designed to pass data from one side of a watertight bulkhead to the other without requiring the bulkhead to be physically penetrated. Through experimentation, we observed that echoes of pulses transmitted through the ultrasonic channel (i.e. the bulkhead) lead to considerable intersymbol interference and hinder high data rate transmission. In this paper, we investigate the nature of this interference and propose a method of mitigating its effect. The method applies a pre-distortion filter to the data which leads to destructive interference that reduces the echo amplitude. Index Terms acoustic data transmission, echo suppression, echo cancellation, inter-symbol interference, pre-distortion

I. INTRODUCTION Wireless sensing and control networks have given machinery designers the flexibility to place network components (sensors, actuators, user interfaces) effectively without many of the installation costs incurred with hardwired devices. However the harsh operating environments of many industrial control applications raise the concern that wireless networks may not be able to provide the same reliable communication that is offered by hardwired networks [7]. Our aim is to increase the reliability of wireless networks whose connectivity is affected by the presence of metallic obstacles. Specifically, we are interested in naval applications where control systems are typically partitioned by watertight metal bulkheads. In this environment, the integrity of the bulkhead must be maintained; we can not penetrate the bulkhead with data cables. To overcome this limitation, we

Figure 1: Experimental Testbed Figure 1 shows the experimental testbed that was used to study the ultrasonic channel. It consists of two ultrasonic transducers, one on either side of a thick steel plate. Our

2 experiments were performed with Panametrics NDT model A112S-RM transducers1 [8]. Between each one of the transducers and the metal plate we applied a thin layer of couplant gel2 designed to maximize the acoustic power transfer between the two components. In this test, we struck the transmitting transducer with a 5 volt, 73ns pulse and observed the response of the receiving transducer. Figure 2 shows the data gathered from this experiment. The upper trace is the signal used to excite the transmitting transducer and the lower trace is the waveform captured by the receiving transducer. Several phenomena are observed in the received signal. First, the transducer acts as a bandpass filter. It resonates at approximately 6.8MHz. (The pulse width of 73ns corresponds to one half of the resonant period. This pulse width was chosen to maximize the ringing amplitude at the receiver.) From the pulse response, we also note that a considerable amount of acoustic energy is retained within the steel bulkhead and it echoes several times before being dissipated to an undetectable level. The undesirable echo effect in figure 2 would limit high data rate transmission. If we use narrow pulses (as in the top trace of figure 2) to encode data at the transmitter, there is an apparent upper data rate beyond which overlap occurs between the individual pulse responses at the receiver. In our testbed, the upper limit was approximately 50kbps. that looks very much like an amplitude scaled, time shifted version of the primary received pulse seen in figure 2, but with none of the trailing echoes (figure 3). It stands to reason that the echoes observed in the original test (figure 2) are due to the bulkhead and the acoustic impedance mismatch between the metal and the transducers. Both received signals in figure 3 are at shown the same time and amplitude scales, 2us/div and 500mV/div respectively. The bulkhead introduces a delay of the primary received pulse as well as attenuation. This observation allows us to simplify the channel model. The effects of the transducer and bulkhead are considered separately and designated as two cascaded blocks in a linear time-invariant system.

Transmit

Receive no bulkhead

Receive with bulkhead

Figure 3: Behavior with and without bulkhead present

Transmit Primary received pulse

Referring again to figure 2, we developed a mathematical model that captures its important features. In doing so, we make the following assumptions: 1. 2. Each of the received echo pulses is scaled and shifted version of the primary pulse.. The amplitude of the ith echo ei (t ) satisfies
Ampl[ei +1 (t )] = Ampl[ei (t )] , where (0 < < 1).

Receive

Echo pulses

Figure 2: Waveforms gathered from initial experiment III. ULTRASONIC PROPAGATION CHANNEL Characterization of the channel is the first step toward developing an effective countermeasure for the echoes. We divide the task into two parts. First, we consider the inputoutput relationship of the system with the bulkhead removed. When performing the original experiment without the bulkhead in place, we get a signal at the receive transducer
1 2

These two assumptions prove to be fair approximations to the behavior observed in the actual system. They allow us to model the channel as a dispersionless transmission line [9]. Figure 4 is a block diagram of the model. The input is x(t) and the output is y(t). The system consists of three cascaded linear time-invariant (LTI) subsystems: the first ultrasonic transducer (electrical to acoustic, impulse response hT 1 (t ) and transfer function T1 ( s ) ); the channel (impulse response
hB (t ) and transfer function B (s ) ); and second ultrasonic

transducer (acoustic to electrical, impulse response hT 2 (t ) and

A112S-RM Contact Transducer, 10 MHz, 0.25 Element Diameter

Panametrics NDT D-12 Couplant D, Gel Type

transfer function T2 ( s ) ).

3 characteristic impedance of steel is 47 x 106 Pa-s/m [5, pp.526-528]. Using equation 2, we calculate that approximately 88% of the signals energy is reflected back into the medium due to impedance mismatch. The reflection coefficient R has an impact on the rate at which echoes decay in the medium and therefore influences . The second parameter, the transit time tT , is affected by both the acoustic propagation velocity within the bulkhead and the thickness of the bulkhead. Expressing the impulse response of the entire channel (C(s) in figure 5) in terms of the impulse response of T(s), we get the following.
hC (t ) = hT (t ) hB (t ) = =0 hT (t (1 + 2n ) tT ) 1+2 n . (3) n

x(t)

T1(s)

B(s)

T2(s)

y(t)

Figure 4: System representation of the channel In figure 5, we rearrange the system, taking advantage of the LTI properties of the system. We develop a single block that represents both transducers (impulse response hT (t ) = hT 1 (t ) hT 2 (t ) and transfer function T ( s ) = T1 ( s )T2 ( s ) ). Transducers x(t) Bulkhead xT(t)

T(s)
x(t)

B(s)
y(t)

y(t)

C(s)

With a suitable description of the bulkheads impulse response, we can now develop a method to cancel the echoes observed in figure 2. IV. ECHO CANCELLATION

Figure 5: Rearrangement of system blocks Referring again to figure 2, we model the impulse response of the bulkhead as a series of time delayed impulses decaying in amplitude.
hB (t ) = =0 (t (1 + 2n ) tT ) 1+ 2 n n

Our approach to echo cancellation is shown in figure 6. We seek a pre-distortion filter P(s) such that P(s)T(s)B(s) T(s). In other words, the pre-distortion filter would mitigate the effects of the bulkhead. Pre-distortion x(t) Transducers Bulkhead

(1)

P(s)
x(t)

T(s) C(s)

B(s)

y(t) = xT(t)

where: tT = transit time of acoustic signal in bulkhead = channel attenuation constant (0 < < 1). The term (1+2n)tT accounts for the transit time of the first pulse through the medium (n = 0) as well as the round trip time of all echoes (n 0). The 1+ 2 n term accounts for the amplitude decay observed with each successive echo. The attenuation parameter depends on the degree of impedance mismatch between the transducer and the bulkhead. The parameter is dependant on the reflection coefficient at each acoustic interface [5, p.151], namely
R= r2 r1 . r2 + r1

P(s)

y(t) = xT(t)

Figure 6: The desired transfer function The required filter can be found through several methods. Note that the impulse response of the bulkhead, equation (1), can be interpreted as an Exponentially Weighted Moving Average (EWMA) filter [6], cascaded with a time delay of tT. Although the time delay portion can not be inverted (by a realizable transfer function), the EWMA portion has an inverse described by the following impulse response [6].
hP (t ) = (t ) 2 (t 2tT )

(2)

(4)

In expression (2), r1 is the characteristic impedance of the bounding fluid (silicone, in our case. The silicone couplant gel used is standard for mating ultrasonic transducers to metal objects in non-destructive testing.), and r2 is the characteristic impedance of the metal channel. A typical value for the characteristic impedance of silicone is 2.5 x 106 Pa-s/m (Pascal-seconds per meter), and a typical value for the

The response of the overall system, i.e. the pre-distortion filter cascaded with the channel, is the convolution of the impulse responses of these two systems. Using equations (3) and (4), we find:

4
h(t) = hP (t) hC (t)

= =0 hT (t (1 + 2n ) tT ) 2 hT ((t (1 + 2n ) tT ) 2tT ) 1+2n n = =0 hT (t tT 2 tT n ) 1+2n =0 hT (t tT 2 tT (1 + n) )1+2(1+n) n n = hT (t tT ) + =1 hT (t tT 2 tT n ) 1+2n =1 hT (t tT 2 tT n ) 1+2n n n

= hT (t tT )

With cancellation

(5)

The pre-distortion filter has the intended effect of suppressing the echo at the system output. The impulse response of the overall system is the response of the transducer cascaded with a time (delay equal to the acoustic channels transit time, tT ). Implementation of the echo cancellation algorithm amounts to taking each transmitted pulse and following it with a time delayed, amplitude scaled version of itself. If properly designed, this canceling pulse will cause destructive interference in the bulkhead, thereby attenuating the echoes. In figure 7, we demonstrate the performance of the echo compensation technique (the transit time delay tT was removed after signal acquisition so the leading edges of the two signals aligned). The canceling pulse introduced at the transmitter combines destructively with the echo, decreasing its amplitude. In figure 8, we show an expanded version of the received signal with and without cancellation. The impact of our technique is a 5dB reduction in the amplitude of the first echo. Figure 7 shows that the second echo pulse from figure 2 is barely visible and the third is below the systems noise floor. The pre-distortion filter P(s) is defined by two parameters, the time delay between primary canceling pulses and the amplitude of the canceling pulse (equation 4). By examination of the time and voltage parameters of the original (uncompensated) received signal, we can determine reasonable values for pre-distortion filter parameters (see Section V).

Without cancellation

Figure 8: A detailed look at echo cancellation performance Although the echo cancellation method reduces the amplitude of the echo, it does not eliminate it. The reason is that the assumptions used in deriving the mathematical model are not completely valid. In particular, the echoes are not just delayed and attenuated replicas of the primary received pulse; close inspection of figure 2 shows some dispersion as well. To achieve more effective cancellation, we must take into account dispersion, frequency varying attenuation and non-linear effects of the channel. Still, the linear model used here has led to a simple and effective method for attenuating channel echoes. The technique allowed us to send data pulses more densely, thereby achieving higher data rates. We are currently sending data at the rate of 1Mbps, with each bit being encoded as a pulse at the transmitter. V. ULTRASONIC CHANNEL TRAINING ALGORITHM The parameters that determine the echo-canceling pulse ( and tT ) depend on the material of the bulkhead and its thickness. Before implementing the cancellation algorithm, we must determine proper values for these parameters. Using a training pulse to excite the system, we are able to estimate the two parameters that define the echo cancellation filter. We strike the transmit transducer with a 73ns, 5V pulse. By capturing the response of the receiving transducer, and analyzing the data, we can estimate the parameters and tT . Figure 9 shows the response of the receiving transducer when the transmitter is struck by a narrow pulse. In the figure, we also show the time between the primary received signal and the first echo, and the amplitudes of the two waveforms.

Primary Pulse Transmit Canceling Pulse Received

Figure 7: Result of using echo cancellation

5 VI. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

Primary Response
= 129mV/314mV = 0.41 2tT =2.19us

First Echo
314mV 129mV

Received

2tT =2.19us

We have described the use of ultrasonic pulses to transmit data through metal barriers as part of a communications system in areas that are confined by metallic barriers. With our transducer/bulkhead combination, data rates of over 50kbps led to inter-symbol interference due to echoes in the channel. To enable high data rate communication, we have developed a method of cancelling these echoes involving channel modeling and introduction of a pre-distortion filter. With this method, the task of detecting data pulses is simplified and data rate can be increased substantially. Our method has allowed for on-off keyed transmission at over 1Mbps and higher data rates are possible with more elaborate data coding schemes. We have observed that some assumptions about the ultrasonic channel are only approximations of the actual behavior. A better transceiver/bulkhead model is likely to lead to an improved pre-distortion filter. VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was funded from the Office of Naval Research under project N05-T020: Wireless Sensing for Survivable Machinery Control. REFERENCES
Hu, Y., Zhang, X., Yang, J., Jiang, Q., "Transmitting electric energy through a metal wall by acoustic waves using piezoelectric transducers," IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control , vol. 50, no. 7 pp. 773- 781, July 2003. [2] Sherrit, S., et. al., "Efficient Electromechanical Network Models for Wireless Acoustic-Electric Feed-throughs," SPIE Smart Structures Conference, vol. 5758, March 2005. [3] Payton R. M., System for acoustically passing electrical signals through a hull, US Patent 6625084, September 23, 2003. [4] Prokic, M. Piezoelectric Converters Modeling and Characterization, MPI Interconsulting, July 23, 2004, On-line: http://www.mpiultrasonics.com. [5] Kinsler, L. E., Frey, A. R., Fundamentals of Acoustics, Fourth Edition, New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 2000. [6] Oppenheim, A.V., Schafer, R.W., Discrete-Time Signal Processing, Second Edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc., 1999. [7] Kevan, T., Shipboard Machine Monitoring for Predictive Maintenance, Sensors Magazine, February 1, 2006. [8] Panametrics NDT, http://www.olympusndt.com/en/. [9] Pozar D. M., Microwave Engineering, Third Edition, New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 2005. [10] Haykin, S. M., Communication Systems, Fourth Edition, New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 2000. [1]

Figure 9: Determining cancellation pulse parameters By taking 2 tT as the measured time delay between the waveforms (2.19us here) and as the ratio of echo amplitude to primary amplitude (0.41 here), we obtain parameter estimates that give very good cancellation performance. Once the received signal is digitized, it is a simple matter to extract these parameters and apply them to the compensation function. In figure 10, we show the received signal before cancellation and the properly tuned cancellation pulse. We have found that while the parameters for the cancellation function can be accurately determined using the above method alone, the accuracy is also related to sample rate and digitizer resolution. The parameter estimates can be used as a starting point for a tuning algorithm. The algorithm would perform a search in two dimensions ( and tT ) for the parameters that give the greatest cancellation. This method would require bidirectional communication between transmitter and receiver in order to converge on the best parameter values.

Echo Spacing

Received Signal with Echo

Cancellation Pulse

Pulse Spacing

Figure 10: Echo and cancellation pulse superimposed