You are on page 1of 36



INDEX......................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 6 Communication channel.............................................................................................8 Wave propogation......................................................................................................9 Acoustic modem.......................................................................................................11 under water networks..............................................................................................12 SECURING................................................................................................................ 22 Applications.............................................................................................................. 28 disadvantage............................................................................................................29 Conclusion................................................................................................................ 29 REFERENCES............................................................................................................ 29


While wireless communication technology today has become part of our daily life, the idea of wireless undersea communications may still seem far-fetched. However, research has been active for over a decade on designing the methods for wireless information transmission underwater. Human knowledge and understanding of the worlds oceans, which constitute the major part of our planet, rests on our ability to collect information from remote undersea locations.The major discoveries of the past

decades, such as the remains of Titanic, or the hydro-thermal vents at bottom of deep ocean, were made using cabled submersibles. Although such systems remain indispensable if high-speed communication link is to exists between the remote end and the surface, it is natural to wonder what one could accomplish without the burden (and cost) of heavy cables.Hence the motivation and interest in wireless underwater communications. Together with sensor technology and vehicular technology, wireless communications will enable new applications ranging from environmental monitoring to gathering of oceanographic data, marine archaeology, and search and rescue missions.

1. A Brief Chronological History of AUV Development

It is informative to understand what has happed over the past few decades relative to the development of AUVs. It is clear that the process has led to a technology whose time has arrived. Prior to 1970 - Special Applications of AUVs

. Initial investigations into the utility of AUV systems. AUV development began in the 1960s. A few AUVs vehicles are built mostly to focused on very specific applications / data gathering. There are not a great amount of published papers that describe these efforts. 1970 - 1980 - Explore the Potential of AUVs . Technology development; some testbeds built. During the 1970s, a number of testbeds were developed. The University of Washington APL developed the UARS and SPURV vehicles to gather data from the Arctic regions. TheUniversity of New Hampshires Marine Systems Engineering Laboratory (now the Autonomous Undersea Systems Institute) developed the EAVE vehicle (an open space-frame AUV) in conjunction with a complementary effort undertaken at the US Navys facility in San Diego. Also at this time the Institute of Marine Technology Problems, Russian Academy of Sciences (IMTP, RAS) began their AUV program with the development of the SKAT vehicles, as well as, the first deep diving AUVs L1 & L2. Other AUV testbeds were also fabricated. This was a time of experimentation with technology in hopes of defining the potential of these autonomous systems. There were some successes and many failures. The vision shared by the development community far exceeded the technology available to implement that vision. None the less, there was significant advancement in AUV development. 1980 - 1990 - Experiment with Prototypes . Advances in technology reinforce development efforts. . Proof of Concept (POC) prototypes are developed/tested/used. In the 1980s there were a number of technological advances outside of the AUV community that greatly affected AUV development. Small, low power computers and memory offered the potential of implementing complex guidance and control algorithms on autonomous platforms. Advances in software systems and engineering made it possible

Figure 3 A possible timetable for the transition of AUV technology from prototype systems to operational vehicle systems is described by the characteristic S curve associated with the introduction of new techno logy into the ma rketplac e. The ye ar 200 0 should see this technology expand into operational use and produce an economic return for dev elopers.

to develop complex software systems able to implement the vision of the system developers. Even with these technological advances, it became quite clear that a number of technology development problems had to be solved if AUVs were to become operational systems. In 1980, the first International Symposium on Unmanned Untethered Submersible Technology (UUST) was held in Durham New Hampshire, USA attended this meeting. By 1987, the attendance had grown to more than 320 people representing more than 100 companies, 20 Universities and 20 federal agencies. Nine countries were represented at the meeting.

Figure 4 Maridan 600, Maridan A/S, Denmark Most importantly in the USA, research programs were begun which provided significant funding to develop proof of concept prototypes. The most published program was the effort at Draper Labs that led to the development of two Large AUVs to be used as testbeds for a number of Navy programs. This decade was indeed the turning point for AUV technology. It was clear that the technology would evolve into operational systems, but not as clear as to the tasks that those systems would perform. 1990 - 2000 - Goal Driven Tech. Development . Broader based funding of technology development. . Many AUVs developed internationally. Users awake. During this decade, AUVs grew from proof of concept testbeds into first generation operational systems able to be tasked to accomplish defined objectives. A number of organizations around the world undertook development efforts focused on various operational tasks. Potential users surfaced and helped to define mission systems necessary to accomplish the objectives of their data gathering programs. This decade also identified new paradigms for AUV utilization such as the Autonomous Oceanographic Sampling System (AOSN) [Curtin] and provided the resources necessary to move the technology closer to commercialization. 2000 - 2010 - Commercial markets grow . First truly commercial products become available. As this decade begins, the utilization of AUV technology for a number of commercial tasks is obvious. Programs are underway to build, operate and

make money using AUVs. Markets have been defined and are being assessed as to viability. This will be the decade that sees AUV technology move from the academic and research environment into the commercial mainstream of the ocean industry. There are still technological problems to be solved. The economic viability of the technology has still to be proven. The AUV must be proven in an operational regime in order for the technology to continue its advance and for industry to embrace its potential.

Figure 5 STDV (Manta AUV NUW C Newpo rt)

Introduction While wireless communication technology today has become part of our daily life, the idea of wireless undersea communications may still seem far-fetched. However, research has been active for over a decade on designing the methods for wireless information transmission underwater. Human knowledge and understanding of the worlds oceans, which constitute the major part of our planet, rests on our ability to collect information from remote undersea locations. The major discoveries of the past decades, such as the remains of Titanic, or the hydro-thermal vents at bottom of deep ocean, were made using cabled submersibles. Although such systems remain indispensable if high-speed communication link is to exists between the remote end and the surface, it is natural to wonder what one could accomplish without the burden (and cost) of heavy cables. Hence the motivation, and interest in wireless underwater communications. Together with sensor technology and vehicular technology, wireless communications will enable new applications ranging from environmental monitoring to gathering of oceanographic data, marine archaeology, and search and rescue missions. The concept of a submersible vehicle is not a new idea. The first American submarine was called Turtle. It was built at Saybrook, Connecticut in 1775 by David Bushnell and hisbrother, Ezra. The Turtle was a little egg-shaped wooden submarine held together by iron straps.Turtle bobbed like a cork in rough surface winds and seas even though she was lead weighted at the bottom. In this hand and footoperated contraption, one person could descend by operating a valve to admit water into the ballast tank

and ascend with the use of pumps to eject the water.Two flap-type air vents at the top opened when the hatch was clear of water and closed when it was as not. The air supply lasted only 30 minutes. The Turtle's first engagement, which took place in New York Harbor in 1776, was also the first naval battle in history involving a submarine. [Pararas] In November of 1879, the Reverend George W. Garrett designed, what was considered by some to be the world's first practical powered submarine, the Resurgam. It was built at the Brittannia Engine Works and Foundry of J. B. Cochran in Birkenhead, England and was powered by a Lamm 'fireless' steam engine, and could travel for some ten hours on power stored in an insulated tank. After these historic underwater vehicles, there have been many more submersibles developed and used operationally for a number of different tasks. With these submarines, came the development of torpedoes. Torpedoes are truly the first (AUVs) Autonomous Underwater Vehicles. Although there are a number of AUV-like systems that were considered prior to the 1970s, most never were used for extended periods of time or discussed in open literature. Since that time a great deal of development has occurred.

1. Manned systems
There are different types of underwater vehicles. One method of categorizing these vehicles is to identify them as members one of two classes of vehicles; manned systems.

described simply as falling into two sub-classes; military submarines and non-military submersibles such as those operated to support underwater investigations andassessment. The navies of the world utilize a number of different classes of submarines to conduct their missions. On the other hand, Alvin (USA), Epaulard (France), Mir (Russia) and Shinkai 6500 (Japan) are all familiar names of small submarines that allow a few individuals to descend into the ocean to gather data and information from observations of the water column and ocean bottom.

Unmanned submersibles

also fall in to a number of different sub-classes. The simplest and most easily described are those submersibles that are towed behind a ship. They act as platforms for various sensor suites attached to the vehicle frame. A second type of submersible system is called a Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV). An ROV is a tethered vehicle. The tether supplies power and communication to the ROV and is controlled directly by a remote operator. A third type of unmanned submersible is an Unmanned Untethered Vehicle(UUV). This untethered vehicle contains its own onboard power, but is controlled by a remote operator via some type of a communications link. An AUV is an undersea system containing its own power and controlling itself while accomplishing a pre-defined task. A further distinction between the AUV and UUV is that the AUV requires no communication during its mission whereas the UUV requires some level of communication for it to complete its assigned mission.1 Communication channel

The signals that are used to carry digital information through an underwater channel are not radio signals, as electro-magnetic waves propagate only over extremely short distances. Instead, acoustic waves are used, which can propagate over long distances. However, an underwater acoustic channel presents a communication system designer with many difficulties. The three distinguishing characteristics of this channel are frequency-dependent propagation loss, severe multipath, and low speed of sound propagation. None of these characteristics are nearly as pronounced in land-based radio channels, the fact that makes underwater wireless communication extremely difficult, and necessitates dedicated system design. Wave propogation

Fig. 1: Shallow water multipath propagation: in addition to the direct path, the signal propagates via reflections from the surface and bottom.

Path loss that occurs in an acoustic channel over a distance d is given as A=dka(f)d, where k is the path loss exponent whose value is usually between 1 and 2, and a(f) is the absorption factor that depends on the frequency f.. This dependence severely limits the available bandwidth: for example, at distances on the order of 100 km, the available bandwidth is only on the order of 1 kHz. At shorter distances, a larger bandwidth is available, but in practice it is limited by the transducer. Also in contrast to the radio systems, an acoustic signal is rarely narrowband, i.e., its bandwidth is not negligible with respect to the center frequency.

Fig. 2: Ensemble of channel impulse responses (magnitudes). Within this limited bandwidth, the signal is subject to multipath propagation, which is particularly pronounced on horizontal channels. In shallow water, multipath occurs due to signal reflection from the surface and bottom, as illustrated in Figure 1. In deep water, it occurs due to ray bending, i.e. the tendency of acoustic waves to travel along the axis of lowest sound speed. Figure 2 shows an ensemble of channel responses obtained in deep water. The multipath spread, measured along the delay axis, is on the order of 10 ms in this example. The channel response varies in time, and also changes if the receiver moves. Regardless of its origin, multipath propagation creates signal echoes, resulting in inter symbol interference in a digital communication system. While in a cellular radio system multipath spans a few symbol intervals, in an underwater acoustic channel it can spans few tens, or even hundreds of symbol intervals! To avoid the inter symbol interference, a guard time, of length at least equal to the multipath spread, must be inserted between successively transmitted symbols. However, this will reduce the overall symbol rate, which is already limited by the system bandwidth. To maximize the symbol rate, a receiver must be designed to counteract very long inter symbol interference. The speed of sound underwater varies with depth and also depends on the environment. Its nominal value is only 1500 m/s, and this fact has a twofold implication on the communication system design. First, it implies long signal delay, which severely reduces the efficiency of any communication protocol that is based on receiver feedback, or hand-shaking between the transmitter and receiver. The resulting latency is similar to that of a space communication system, although there it is a consequence of long distances traveled. Secondly, low speed of sound results in severe Doppler distortion in a mobile acoustic system. Namely, if the relative velocity between the transmitter and receiver is v, then a signal of frequency fc will be observed at the receiver as having frequency fc (1v/c). At the same time, a waveform of duration T will be observed at the receiver as having duration T(1v/c). Hence, Doppler shifting and spreading occur. For the velocity v on the order of few m/s, the factor v/c, which determines the severity of the Doppler distortion, can be several orders of magnitude greater than the one observed in a land-mobile radio system! To avoid this distortion, a noncoherent modulation/detection must be employed. Coherent modulation/detection offers a far better utilization of bandwidth, but the receiver must be designed to deal with extreme Doppler distortion. Summarizing the channel characteristics, one comes to the conclusion that an underwater acoustic link combines in itself the worst aspects of radio channels: poor quality of a land-mobile link, and high latency of a space link. In addition, current technology offers limited transducer bandwidth (typically a few kHz, or few tens of kHz in a wideband system), half-duplex operation, and limited power supply of battery-operated instruments.


. Fig. 3: Multichannel adaptive decision-feedback equalizer (DFE) is used for high-speed underwater acoustic communications. It supports any linear modulation format, such as M-ary PSK or M-ary QAM Acoustic modem Acoustic modem technology today offers two types of modulation/detection: frequency shift keying (FSK) with noncoherent detection and phase-shift keying (PSK) with coherent detection. FSK has traditionally been used for robust acoustic communications at low bit rates (typically on the order of 100 bps). To achieve bandwidth efficiency, i.e. to transmit at a bit rate greater than the available bandwidth, the information must be encoded into the phase or the amplitude of the signal, as it is done in PSK or quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM). For example, in a 4-PSK system, the information bits (0 and 1) are mapped into one of four possible symbols, 1j. The symbol stream modulates the carrier, and the so-obtained signal is transmitted over the channel. To detect this type of signal on a multipath-distorted acoustic channel, a receiver must employ an equalizer whose task is to unravel the inter symbol interference. Since the channel response is not apriori known (moreover, it is time-varying) the equalizer must learn the channel in order to invert its effect. A block diagram of an adaptive decision-feedback equalizer (DFE) is shown in Figure 3. In this configuration, multiple input signals, obtained from spatially diverse receiving hydrophones, can be used to enhance the system performance. The receiver parameters are optimized to minimize the mean squared error in the detected data stream. After the initial training period, during which a known symbol sequence is transmitted, the equalizer is adjusted adaptively, using the output symbol decisions. An integrated Doppler tracking algorithm enables the equalizer to operate in a mobile scenario. This receiver structure has been used on various types of acoustic channels. Current achievements include transmission at bit rates on the order of one kbps over long ranges (10-100


nautical miles) and several tens of kbps over short ranges (few km) as the highest rates reported to date. On a more unusual note, successful operation was also demonstrated over a basin scale (3000 km) at 10 bps, as well as over a short vertical channel at a bit rate in excess of 100 kbps. The multichannel DFE forms the basis of a high-speed acoustic modem implemented at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. The modem, shown in Figure 4, is implemented in a fixed-point DSP, with a floating-point co-processor for high-rate mode of operation. When active, it consumes about 3 W in receiving mode, and 10-50 W to transmit. The board measures 1.75 _ 5 in, and accommodates four input channels. The modem has successfully been deployed in a number of trials, including autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) communications at 5 kbps.

Fig. 4: The WHOI micromodem has dual mode of operation: low

under water networks With advances in acoustic modem technology, sensor technology and vehicular technology, ocean engineering today is moving towards integration of these components into autonomous underwater networks. While current applications include supervisory control of individual AUVs, and telemetry of oceanographic data from bottom-mounted instruments, the vision of future is that of a digital ocean in which integrated networks of instruments, sensors, robots and vehicles will operate together in a variety of underwater environments. Examples of emerging applications include fleets of AUVs deployed on collaborative search missions, and ad hoc deployable sensor networks for environmental monitoring.


Fig. 5: Centralized network topology

AUSI & IMTP, RAS, FEB The problem of autonomy still remains unsolved. There have been some successes with other autonomous systems, but those advances have not been brought into the AUV community. There are very few programs funded to address these issues and the problem remains. As AUV operations increase, it will become apparent that more investigation is needed. This will again emphasize the need for more development along the lines of making AUV systems more intelligent and better able to adapt to the environment within which they exist. The use of multiple cooperating AUVs was first considered in the 1980s. Some work was undertaken, but not completed. Since that time, there has been little funded work on this technological issue. In the past few years, there has been increased recognition of the potential of multiple cooperating AUVs. Currently some work is underway to investigate cooperating


AUVs tasked to meet some of the needs of mine clearance. Many more investigations are required as the problem is a significant problem and far from being solved. Energy Systems / Energy management; Endurance of AUVs has increased from a few hours to 10s of hours. Some systems now contemplate missions of days and, a very few, of years. This extended endurance, however, is at the expense of sensing capability, as well as very limited transit speeds. In the majority of early AUV systems, Lead Acid batteries were the workhorse for energy systems. Some AUV designs included Silver Zinc batteries, but, for the most part, the cost was prohibitive. Some applications, such as the ABE vehicle, utilized Lithium primary batteries. A number of other chemistries were tried for different applications. Recent advances in NiMH batteries have provided new opportunities for AUV and this technology is being used in many of the current AUV systems. In 1987 the use of an Aluminum / Oxygen semi-cell was proposed to DARPA for use in an AUV. A number of years later a similar system development was funded and dramatically increased the endurance of the DARPA UUV. Currently the ALTEX [altex] program is underway to utilize similar technology to allow an AUV to transit under the Arctic ice. Solar Energy is now being used to power an AUV [AUSI]. This system demands a detailed design of onboard energy management; both during the acquisition phase, as well as, the utilization phase of operations. It is an inexhaustible energy source but requires an AUV to surface while recharging. The Glider AUVs [Simonetti] utilize heat energy to vary the buoyancy of an AUV that can glide up and down in the water column. The potential endurance of such a system is measured in years. Navigation; Early AUV systems relied on dead reckoning for their navigation. Acoustic transponder navigation systems provided greater accuracy but at a significant logistics cost. Inertial navigation systems were available for more expensive AUVs, but costs were prohibitive for the non-military user. With advances in inertial platform technology, the cost has dropped significantly to a point where it is possible to utilize these systems for lower cost AUVs. Navigation systems continue to improve in accuracy as well as precision. In the past few years, many AUVs have taken advantage of Global Positioning Systems (GPS). When the vehicle surfaces, it is possible to obtain an accurate position and update onboard inertial systems. Still, there is strong interest in being able to navigate relative to the environment within which the system exists. This environment referenced navigation utilizing bottom features, gravimetric variations or other similar characteristics is an objective to be attained. A successful system will provide a significant increase in AUV capability. Sensor Systems and Processing / 3D Imaging; An AUV is simply a platform on which to mount sensors and sensing systems. Initial efforts to develop AUV technology was more concerned about the basic technologies required to allow reliable vehicle operation. As that reliability was achieved, sensors were added to the vehicle system to acquire data from the ocean environment. Most of these efforts to date have been to integrate existing sensors and sensor processing to the sometimes unique constraints of the AUV. This paradigm has proven to work reasonably well. Recently it has been recognized that we must develop entirely new sensors based on the constraints imposed by an AUV. This would change the paradigm of sensor integration. It would encourage the development of sensors specifically for AUVs; smarter, lower power, highly reliable, smaller in size, etc. It is also becoming clear that AUVs can be used in groups to act cooperatively to acquired needed data. By maintaining a common spatial and temporal reference, data acquired by multiple AUVs can be aggregated and processed to obtain synoptic, high resolution data describing a process of interest. Much work continues on the development of higher and higher resolution imaging systems, both optical and acoustic. With the new processors it has been possible to obtain very high resolution images over longer and longer ranges


[LENS]. The roadblock to much of this work is the ability to analyze the acquired data autonomously such that the AUV can utilize this data for guidance and control decisions. This perception ability is still beyond the current capabilities of AUVs. Communications; In the underwater environment acoustic communications is probably the most viable communication system available to the system designer. Some development programs have investigated and evaluated other technologies such as laser communication at short range and relatively noise free communications over larger ranges using RF current field density techniques. In the past 10 years there has been significant advances in acoustic communications such that relatively low error rate communications is possible over ranges of kMs at bit rate of a few kbps [Comms]. This remains an active area of investigation. Another aspect of communication is the issue of connecting multiple vehicles and/or bottom mounted instrument platforms via a networked-based communication infrastructure. This subsea network can then be connected to a surface vehicle that will act as a gateway to the terrestrial based communication infrastructure such as the internet [Welsh]. Efforts are underway to investigate how to implement such a network and be able to have effective communications among and between multiple underwater systems. Other technologies have been investigated over the years such as those below. There have been a number of significant advances in these areas and, although there is still much to be learned, they do not represent major stumbling blocks to the further advancement of AUV technology at this time. These technologies continue to be investigated and refined in the development of operational systems. There remain some important advances to be made such as in the area of autonomous manipulation but the emphasis of current activities are not along these lines. Guidance /Low Level Control Hydrodynamics and Control Systems Autonomous Manipulation / Work Systems User Interface / Development Tools / Emulation / Modeling There are also issues associated with the basic system design. It is clear that the system design must result from an understanding of the mission to be undertaken by the system. Over the past few decades, there has been an increased effort to standardize such that advances in nsystem design can be shared by the community. This move toward standardization has increased dramatically over the past few years as AUV systems move closer and closer to operational systems. Another aspect of the system design that has become commonplace is the tendency to think in terms of modularity. This is seen in current efforts to design distributed control systems architecture both in terms of software and hardware. The concept of plug & play is becoming a buzz word for AUV developers as well as PC users. In an environment where new sensors are added to AUV systems on a regular basis, it is obvious that a simple method for managing the impact on the vehicle software system is important. As AUV systems mature to a point where they are being commercialized, the importance of cost reliability and robustness are gaining increased importance. These are the characteristics that are best optimized by industry. The next few years will undoubtedly see AUVs undergo a strong systems design process to optimize these features. This will benefit the community as a whole and should be well received by the potential user community of the future. Software System Architecture / Distributed Control Hardware System Architecture / Standardization Platform Design Cost / Reliability / Robustness


Figure 7 DORADO, ISE, Canada Current Activities/Players At one point in time it was relatively easy to identify all of the ongoing efforts related to the development of AUV technology. The players were few and, more than not, professional acquaintances and friends. Some of the more advertised efforts can, however, be summarized. The community though international in scope, was well aware of each others work. In the late 80s the number of individuals and organizations increased significantly. Since then, the number of players has continued to increase. It is now quite impossible to understand the full breadth of ongoing technology development or, even more impossible, to assess progress in the area of commercialization. Current activities fall into two categories. First there is a significant amount of research underway to investigate enabling technologies pacing further development of AUV systems. Secondly, there is considerable effort to design, fabricate and evaluate AUV systems under operational conditions. This development activity is being driven somewhat by the evolving markets for AUV technology. Research & Development; Current AUV development programs are, in many cases, being supported by funding that results from the political process as opposed to market need or technical merit. This, however, is a current reality within which development of AUV technology advances. Although these programs are very visible due to the level of activity, it is short sited to over emphasize some of these activities over smaller, less advertised work. There are a number of organizations in the USA, and elsewhere, actively working on important research problems. As mentioned above, there is much to be understood regarding technologies such as Autonomy,

Energy, Navigation, Sensors, and Communications. These are very much open research topics. Evolving markets; At this point in time we are seeing a number of markets beginning to form. Although not clearly defined the level of enthusiasm of a number of individuals and organizations suggests that we will see many opportunities for commercializing AUV technology over the next few years. Individual companies, as well as teams of organizations, have begun efforts to make operational AUVs part of the oil & gas industry toolkit. Missions have been defined, contracts let, vehicle systems designed, and fabrication of the operational systems begun. The next few years will provide insight into the real capability of the commercial AUV [Hasan].

Figure 8 The Slocum AUV Webb Research Inc In the area of Ocean Science, the potential for AUV systems is clearly recognized by most researchers. Successes of ABE, AUTOSUB [GRIF97] and other vehicles in gathering scientifically significant data has made a positive impact on the community. New sensors, uniquely suited for AUVs, are being developed. Indeed, the worry is that too much is expected from this evolving technology. Clearly the success and failures of the next few years will help adjust system capabilities and user expectations. This is sign of a maturing technology. It is generally agreed that AUV technology has an important role to play in the future ocean science data acquisition programs. The US Navy is encouraging and supporting a coordinated effort sometimes referred to as the AOSN [Curtin]. This effort suggests that multiple AUVs can be networked together to acquire oceanographic data and information in spatial and temporal resolution far exceeding current capabilities. It emphasizes coastal areas but, conceptually, a long term view would envision a similar system obtaining required information throughout the oceans of the world. International efforts are perhaps further along the path to truly operational systems. Almost from the start, AUV development has encouraged collaboration among academic, industrial and government partners. This has focused development to address real market needs. Again, it will be interesting to see where many of these efforts will provide an economic impact. AUVs; a Culture Issue The use of autonomous systems is a revolutionary concept in that the user has very little, if any control over the system as it performs its task. Even space-based satellites can be reached by high data rate communications. The user never really loses control of the system except for very small periods of time. AUVs, on the other hand, by definition, will control themselves over


extended periods of time. How soon the user will accept the idea of giving up real time control is unknown. In the short term, that control will be implemented over low data rate communication links. If AUV technology is to truly prove its value, that near real time control function must be eliminated or, at least, minimized. Applications requiring higher levels of autonomy will pace this evolution. Over the years it has become reasonably clear that there will be no single AUV concept that meets all user needs. A number of workshops have suggested a number of different types of AUVs (size, complexity, and capability). In the 1970s it was possible to count the number of AUV systems on the fingers of your hands. A recent effort to catalogue AUV systems lists 145 different types of AUV. In the final analysis, an AUV system design must be driven by a specific mission. ISE has taken this philosophy one step further by constructing a web-based tool that allows a potential user to design a specific AUV to meet his/her needs. As operational experience increases, preferred types of AUVs will undoubtedly be identified. The only trend that can be seen now is the two paths that the marketplace has established. The first is the development of small, low cost AUVs. It is envisioned that these systems can eventually be used in groups of cooperating vehicles. The second type of AUVs are much larger systems containing complex sensor suites configured to meet specific user needs. These are not low cost systems but they are able to undertake tasks that, if done in other ways, would be far more expensive to accomplish. It will be interesting to watch the evolution of these two trends in AUV development. As clearly as AUV development will be driven by the market place, it will be further impacted by the decisions made as to how the businesses that provide AUVs will be structured. Many business models are surfacing. Individual companies spun off from academic efforts have formed. Other models suggest that the appropriate structure is to form a consortium approach that teams multiple academic organizations in some fashion with a commercial organization. Still another model teams large corporations to focus on a specific market. Some individuals state that since AUV technology is so expensive requiring diverse expertise, only a large company or group of organizations can compete. Others suggest that since technology changes so quickly only small organization have the flexibility to adapt quickly. In this final analysis, both models may be right for difference markets. The next few years will tell. AUV systems are at a transition point. They are moving from the Science and Technology communities into the commercial marketplace. They must now show a return on the dollars invested over the last 30 years. State of the Art The following provides a discussion of emerging capabilities that will directly benefit scientists who are interested in using AUVs. By far the most important considerations by which to assess a vehicles state of the art are: 1. Does the system inspire confidence? Is it easy to use and reliable? 2. Does it provide a complete solution, i.e., mission planning, execution, data 3. analysis, and report generation? 4. Does the vehicle provide access to a wide variety of sensors? 5. Is there a safe and reliable means of launching and recovering the system?


6. Can it be operated from ships of opportunity? Historically, AUVs navigate through the ocean under the assumption that the ocean is large and contains few obstacles that will impede the completion of their mission. They execute scripts that take them from objective to objective. They may react differently to a rising or falling seafloor based on the need to maintain a constant altitude above the bottom and not collide with the bottom, but in general they do use sensor data obtained during a mission to make them more successful and/or reliable. Sensor information is recorded. It is not processed and used to provide the vehicle with the ability to adapt, and change its current objective; it is simply recorded for future analysis. The ability to imbed software into a vehicle system that can alter the vehicles current mission, based on measurements from the sensor(s) it carries, and direct it toward a source or phenomena of interest will greatly reduce the time it takes to locate and study such phenomenon of interest. Following a plume of whatever to its source, detecting an obstacle ahead and maneuvering around it, and following a layer in the sea are all examples of how AUVs can be made more intelligent and useful. These capabilities are available in some systems today. The capability for one vehicle to pass information that it acquires from a sensor to another vehicle via an acoustic link, so that the second vehicle may then redirect its own mission based on the information, can be extended to multiple vehicles. These cooperative relationships exemplify the emerging potential of multiple vehicle operations; extension of this concept beyond two or three systems invokes the need for water space management- an underwater air traffic control system. Future Possibilities The trouble with our times is that the future is not what it used to be. Paul Valery Finding better ways of observing and reporting on the interior of the ocean, its seafloors and coastal boundaries remain principal objectives of the oceanographic community. Utilizing productive and affordable technologies that offer a new perspective of the ocean by providing sampling methodologies that merge the high spatial resolution of ship-based surveys with the endurance and temporal resolution of moorings may be one better way The broad use of this technology by the ocean science community is hopefully in our future. C&C Technologies, Inc.s AUV Hugin has proven that the cost of deep water survey operations can be reduced by 40% to 60% by using AUVs rather than conventional methods, while improving the quality of the data that is collected [12]. Given the budgetary constraints that face the oceanographic community and the need for high quality data, it is unwise to ignore this The Future of AUV Technology AUV technology has followed a path not unlike other technologies. It has gone through stages where academic curiosity was followed by research investigation and prototype development. Applications have recently surfaced that seem to have sufficient financial backing to develop operational systems. Certainly the timing of AUV technology was good. It has been able to leverage its development by utilizing many technologies developed for other markets. The next five years will see the expansion of AUV technology into the commercial marketplace.


The size of that market is unclear but the move into the marketplace has begun. There are still many important research investigations to be undertaken. Autonomy is probably the most important issue to be addressed but others, such as those described above, certainly must be addressed. It is clear that the limit to the capability of any AUV is the amount of energy it has onboard. There have been many discussions that suggest that fuel cell technology has reached a point where it may well be possible to use this technology in AUV systems. The increase in endurance will be substantial. Is this the silver bullet for AUVs? I would suggest that there is no silver bullet, but rather a continuum of activity that spans a wide spectrum. Basic research into some of the enabling technologies must be supported. The development of operationally reliable systems must be undertaken. Unique markets where AUV technology can make a significant impact must be identified. Most important, the AUV community must educate the user community of the future about AUV systems capabilities and operational reliability Decentralized network topology. Depending on the application, future underwater networks are likely to evolve in two directions: centralized and decentralized networks. The two types of topologies are illustrated in Figure 5 and Figure 6. In a centralized network, nodes communicate through a base station that covers one cell. Larger area is covered by more cells whose base stations are connected over a separate communications infrastructure. The base stations can be on the surface and communicate using radio links, as shown in the figure, or they can be on the bottom, connected by a cable. Alternatively, the base station can be movable as well. In a decentralized network, nodes communicate via peer-to-peer, multi-hop transmission of data packets. The packets must be relayed to reach the destination, and there may be a designated end node to a surface gateway. Nodes may also form clusters for a more efficient utilization of communication channel. To accommodate multiple users within a selected network topology, the communication channel must be shared, i.e. access to the channel must be regulated. Methods for channel sharing are based on scheduling or on contention. Scheduling, or deterministic multiple-access, includes frequency, time and code-division multiple-access (FDMA, TDMA, CDMA) as well as a more elaborate technique of spacedivision multiple access (SDMA). Contention-based channel sharing does not rely on an a-priori division of channel resources; instead, all the nodes contend for the use of channel, i.e., they are allowed to transmit randomly at will, in the same frequency band and at the same time, but in doing so they must follow a protocol for medium-access control (MAC) to ensure that their information packets do not collide. All types of multiple-access are being considered for the underwater acoustic systems. Experimental systems today favor either polling, TDMA, or multiple-access collision avoidance (MACA) based on a hand-shaking contention procedure that requires an exchange of requests and clearances to send (RTS/CTS). Intelligent collision avoidance appears to be necessary in an underwater channel, where the simple principle of carrier sensing multiple access (CSMA) is severely compromised


due to the long propagation delaythe fact that the channel is sensed as idle at some location does not guarantee that a data packet is not already in transmission at a remote location. one of the major aspects of the evolving underwater networks is the requirement for scalability. A method for channel sharing is scalable if it is equally applicable to any number of nodes in a network of given density. For example, a pure TDMA scheme is not scalable, as it rapidly looses efficiency on an underwater channel due to the increase in maximal propagation delay with the area of coverage. In order to make this otherwise appealing scheme scalable, it can be used locally, and combined with another technique for spatial reuse of channel resources. The resulting scheme is both scalable and efficient; however, it may require a sophisticated dynamic network management. In contrast, contention-based channel allocation offers simplicity of implementation, but its efficiency is limited by the channel latency. Hence, there is no single best approach to the deployment of an underwater network. Instead, selection of communication algorithms and network protocols is driven by the particular system requirements and performance/complexity trade-offs.

Fig. 7:A deep-sea observatory. Research today is active on all topics in underwater communication networks: from fundamental capacity analyses to the design of practical network protocols on all layers of the network architecture (including medium access and data link control, routing, transport control and application layers) as well as cross-layer network optimization. In addition to serving as stand-alone systems, underwater acoustic networks will find application in more complex, heterogeneous systems for ocean observation. Figure 7 shows the concept of a deep sea observatory. At the core of this system is an underwater cable that hosts a multitude of sensors and instruments, and provides high-speed connection to the surface. A wireless network, integrated into the overall structure, will provide a mobile extension, thus extending the reach of observation. While we have focused on acoustic wireless communications, it has to be noted that this will not be the only way of establishing wireless communication in the future underwater networks. Optical waves, and in particular those in the blue-green region, offer much higher throughput (Mbps) albeit over short distances (up to about 100 m). As such, they offer a wireless transmission capability that complements acoustic communication



In UWCNs the following security requirements should be considered.

Authentication is the proof that the data was sent by a legitimate sender. It is essential in mili-tary and safety-critical applications of UWCNs. Authentication and key establishment are strong-ly related because once two or more entities ver-ify each others authenticity, they can establish one or more secret keys over the open acoustic channel to exchange information securely; con-versely, an already established key can be used to perform authentication. Traditional solutions for key generation and update (renewal) algo-rithms should be adapted to better address the characteristics of the underwater channel. In [6], a key generation system is proposed that requires only a threshold detector, lightweight computa-tion, and communication costs. It exploits reciprocity, deep fades (strong destructive interference), randomness extractor, and robust secure fuzzy information reconciliators. This way, the key is generated using the characteris-tics of the underwater channel and is secure against adversaries who know the number of deep fades but not their locations.


Distributed underwater sensor nodes

Intruder submarine

Surface sink

Data path

Data transmitted to the on-shore command center

CONFIDENTIALITY Confidentiality means that information is not accessible to unauthorized third parties. There-fore, confidentiality in critical applications such as maritime surveillance (Fig. 5) should be guar-anteed. INTEGRITY


It ensures that information has not been altered by any adversary. Many underwater sensor appli-cations for environmental preservation, such as water quality monitoring [7], rely on the integrity of information. AVAILABILITY The data should be available when needed by an authorized user. Lack of availability due to denial-ofserviceattacks would especially affect time-critical aquatic exploration applications such as prediction of seaquakes.

RESEARCH CHALLENGES The security issues and open challenges for secure time synchronization, localization, and routing in UWCNs are summarized in the fol-lowing sections. SECURE TIME SYNCHRONIZATION Time synchronization is essential in many under-water applications such as coordinated sensing tasks . Also, scheduling algorithms such as time-division multiple access (TDMA) require precise timing between nodes to adjust their sleep-wake-up schedules for power saving. For example, in water quality monitoring [7], sensors are deployed at different depths because the chemi-cal characteristics of water vary at each level. The design of a delay-tolerant time synchroniza-tion mechanism is very important to accurately locate the water contaminant source, set up the sleep-wakeup schedules among neighboring nodes appropriately, and log the water quality data correctly into the annual database with accurate timing information. Achieving precise time synchronization is especially difficult in underwater environments due to the characteristics of UWCNs. For this reason, the time synchronization mechanisms proposed for groundbased sensor networks can-not be applied, and new mechanisms have been proposed. Tri-Message [8] is a time synchroniza-tion protocol designed for high-latency networks with a synchronization precision that increases with distance. A multilateration algorithm is pro-posed in [9] for localization and synchronization in 3D underwater acoustic sensor networks. It is assumed that a set of anchors, several buoys on the ocean surface, already know their locations and time without error. A group of nearby sensors receives synchronization packets containing the coordinates and packet transmit times from at least five anchor nodes and performs multilat-eration to obtain their own locations. The sen-sors learn the time difference between themselves and each anchor node by comparing their local times at which they received the time


synchronization packet with the transmit time plus propagation delays; these nodes subse-quently become new anchor nodes and there after broadcast new synchronization packets to a larger range, and so on. MU-Sync [10] is a clus-ter-based synchronization protocol that esti-mates the clock skew by performing the linear regression twice over a set of local time informa-tion gathered through message exchanges. The first linear regression enables the cluster head to offset the effect of long and varying propagation delay; the second regression enables the cluster-head to obtain the final estimated skew and off-set. None of the aforementioned time synchro-nization schemes [810] consider security, although it is critical in the underwater environ-ment. Time synchronization disruption due to masquerade, replay and message manipulation attacks, can be addressed using cryptographic techniques [11]. However, countering other pos-sible attacks such as delays (deliberate delaying the transmission of time synchronization mes-sages) [11] and DoS attacks requires the use of other strategies. The countermeasures against delay attacks proposed in [11] for ground-based sensor networks are not applicable to UWCNs. They are based on the detection of outliers (malicious time offsets), but they do not distin-guish between deliberate alterations and abnor-mal values resulting from long and variable propagation delays or node mobility. Moreover, they do not support global synchronization in multi-hop sensor networks. A correlation-based security model for water quality monitoring systems has been proposed in [7] to detect outlier timestamps due to insider attacks. The authors prove that the acoustic propagation delays between two sensors in neighboring depth levels fit an approximately normal distribution, which means that the times-tamps between them should correlate. However, this correlation is lost if a captured inside node is sending falsified timestamps. With proper design of a timestamp sliding window scheme, insider attacks are detected. Each sensor should obtain timestamp readings from multiple sensors and calculate the correlation coefficient for each neighbors timestamp, obtaining a window of coefficients. If a coefficient of the window of data is below a threshold, it is an outlier value. If the abnormal percentage of data in one window (outlier percentage) is consistently (10 consecu-tive windows) higher than a predetermined threshold, the corresponding neighbor is flagged as a malicious node generating insider attacks. However, identifying a neighbor node as mali-cious is difficult, because sometimes timestamps can be corrupted due to propagation delay varia-tions caused by the channel rather than deliber-ately. Because of wave motion, the signal multipath components undergo time-varying propagation delays. Node mobility due to water currents also modifies the propagation delays. In order to better distinguish between unintended and malicious timestamp alterations, the authors in [12] improve the proposed scheme by using as a second step a statistical reputation and trust model to detect outlier timestamps, and identify nodes generating insider attacks. It is based on quantitative measurements and on the assump-tion that identifying an insider attacker requires long-term behavior observations. The following open research issues for secure time synchronization need to be addressed: Because of the high and variable propagation delays of UWCNs, the time required to syn-chronize nodes should be investigated. Efficient and secure time synchronization schemes with small computation and commu-nications costs need to be designed to defend against delay and wormhole attacks.


SECURE LOCALIZATION Localization is a very important issue for data tagging. Sensor tasks such as reporting the occur-rence of an event or monitoring require localiza-tion information. Localization can also help in making routing decisions. For example, the underwater sensors in [13] learn the location and speed of mobile beacons and neighbors during the localization phase; the position and motion of mobile beacons are used by the routing proto-col to choose the best relay for a node to for-ward its data. Localization approaches proposed for ground-based sensor networks do not work well underwater because long propagation delays, Doppler effect, multipath, and fading cause vari-ations in the acoustic channel. Bandwidth limita-tions, node mobility, and sparse deployment of underwater nodes also affect localization estima-tion. Proposed terrestrial localization schemes based on received signal strength (RSS) are not recommended in UWCNs, since non-uniform acoustic signal propagation causes significant variations in the RSS. Time of arrival (ToA) and time difference of arrival (TDoA) measurements require very accurate time synchronization (which is a challenging issue), and angle of arrival (AoA) algorithms are affected by the Doppler shift. Localization schemes can be classified into: Range-based schemes (using range and/or bearing information): The location of nodes in the network is estimated through precise dis-tance or angle measurements. Anchor-based schemes: Anchor nodes are deployed at the seabed or sea surface at loca-tions determined by GPS. The propagation delay of sound signals between the sensor [9] or AUV and the anchors is used to compute the distance to multiple anchor nodes. Distributed positioning schemes: Positioning infrastructure is not available, and nodes com-municate only with one-hop neighbors and com-pute their locations using multilateration. Underwater sensor positioning (USP) has been proposed in [14] as a distributed localization scheme for sparse 3D networks, transforming the 3D underwater positioning problem into a 2D problem using a distributed non-degenera-tive projection technique. Using sensor depth information, the neighboring reference nodes are mapped to the horizontal plane containing the sensor to be localized. After projecting the reference nodes, localization methods for 2D networks such as bilateration or trilateration can be used to locate the sensor. Schemes that use mobile beacons/anchors: They use mobile beacons whose locations are always known. Scalable localization with mobili-ty prediction (SLMP) has been proposed in [15] as a hierarchical localization scheme. At the beginning, only surface nodes know their loca-tions, and anchor nodes can be localized by these surface buoys. Anchor nodes are selected as reference nodes because of their known loca-tions; with the advance of the location process more ordinary nodes are localized and become reference nodes. During this process, every node predicts its future mobility pattern accord-ing to its past known location information. The future location is estimated based on this pre-diction. Range-free schemes (not using range or bear-ing information): They have been designed as simple schemes to compute only coarse position estimates. A range-free scheme proposed in [16] estimates the location of a sensor within a cer-tain area. None of the aforementioned localization schemes [9, 1316] was designed with security in mind. Some localization-specific attacks (replay attack, Sybil attack, wormhole attack) have pre-viously been

described. Open research issues for secure localization are: Effective cryptographic primitives against injecting false localization information in UWCNs need to be developed. It is necessary to design resilient algorithms able to determine the location of sensors even in the presence of Sybil and wormhole attacks. Techniques to identify malicious or compro-mised anchor nodes and to avoid false detec-tion of these nodes are required. Secure localization mechanisms able to handle node mobility in UWCNs need to be devised.

SECURE ROUTING Routing is essential for packet delivery in UWCNs. For example, the Distributed Under-water Clustering Scheme (DUCS) [17] does not use flooding and minimizes the proactive routing message exchange. Routing is specially challenging in UWCNs due to the large propagation delays, the low bandwidth, the difficulty of battery refills of underwater sensors, and the dynamic topologies. Therefore, routing protocols should be designed to be energy-aware, robust, scalable and adap-tive. Many routing protocols have been proposed for underwater wireless sensor networks. How-ever, none of them has been designed with security as a goal. Routing attacks can disable the entire networks operation. Spoofing, alter-ing, or replaying routing information affects routing. Important routing attacks (selective forwarding, sinkhole attack, Sybil attack, worm-hole attack, HELLO flood attack, acknowledg-ment spoofing) have been previously described. Although the attacks against routing in UWCNs are the same as in ground-based sensor net-works, the same countermeasures are not directly applicable to UWCNs due to their dif-ference in characteristics. Proposed broadcast authentication methods would cause high com-munication overhead and latency in UWCNs. Multipath routing would cause high communi-cation overhead as well. Routing is specially challenging in UWCNs due to the large propagation delays, low band-width, difficulty of battery refills of underwater sensors, and dynam-ic topologies. There-fore, routing protocols should be designed to be energy-aware, robust, scalable and adaptive. The proper function-ing of these schemes is challenging because they do not work well in mobile environments, the time required to detect compromised nodes increases substantially in UWCNs due to the long propagation delays, and they must be adapted to tolerate short-term disruptions. Open research issues for secure routing are: There is a need to develop reputation-based schemes that analyze the behavior of neighbors and reject routing paths containing selfish nodes that do not cooperate in routing. The proper functioning of these schemes is challenging because they do not work well in mobile environ-ments, the time required to detect compromised nodes increases substantially in UWCNs due to the long propagation delays, and they must be adapted to tolerate short27

term disruptions. Quick and powerful encryption and authen-tication mechanisms against outside intruders should be devised for UWCNs because the time required for intruder detection is high due to the long and variable propagation delays, and rout-ing paths containing undetected malicious nodes can be selected in the meantime for packet for-warding. Sophisticated mechanisms should be devel-oped against insider attacks such as selective forwarding, Sybil attacks, HELLO flood attacks, and acknowledgment spoofing. There is a need to develop new techniques against sinkholes and wormholes, and improve existing ones. With Dis-VoW [2] a wormhole attack can still be concealed by manipulating the buffering times of distance estimation packets. The wormhole-resilient neighbor discovery in [5] is affected by the orientation error between sen-sors. CONCLUSIONS In this article we have discussed security in UWCNs, underlining the specific characteristics of these networks, possible attacks, and counter-measures. The main research challenges related to secure time synchronization, localization, and routing have also been surveyed. These research issues remain wide open for future investigation. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was supported by the Spanish Min-istry of Education and Science under project TSI200766637-C02-01.

BIOGRAPHY MARI CARMEN DOMINGO ( received her Lic. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from Barcelona Tech University, Spain, in 1999 and 2005, respectively. She currently works as an assistant professor in the Electrical Engineering Department of the same university. Her current research interests are in the area of network security, sensor, and wireless networks

1. Future applications could enhance myriad industries, ranging from the offshore oil industry

to aquaculture to fishing industries, she noted. Additionally, pollution control, climate recording, ocean monitoring (for prediction of natural disturbances) and detection of objects on the ocean floor are other areas that could benefit from enhanced underwater communications.

2. 3. 4. 5.

Environmental monitoring to gathering of oceanographic data Marine archaeology Search and resce missions Defence

disadvantage 1. Battery power is limited and usually batteries cannot be recharged also because solar energy cannot be exploited . 2. The available bandwidth is severly limited. 3. Channel characteristics including long and variable propagation delays 4. Multipath and fading problems. 5. High bit error rate. Conclusion In this topic we overviewed the main challenges for efficient communication in under water acoustic sensor networks. We outlined the peculiarities of the under water channel with particular reference to networking solutions the ultimate objective of this topic is to encourage research efforts to lay down fundamental basics for the development of new advanced communication techniques for efficient under water communication and networking for enhanced ocean monitoring and exploration applications The aim of this is to build a acoustic communication This is not only the way for underwater communication By using optical waves which offers higher throughput (Mbps) over short distances (up to about 100 m) REFERENCES








REFERENCES Akyildiz, D. Pompili, and T. Melodia, Underwater Acoustic Sensor Networks: Research Challenges, Ad Hoc Net., vol. 3, no. 3, Mar. 2005 W Wang et al., Visualization of Wormholes in Under-water Sensor Networks: A Distributed Approach, Intl. J. Security Net., vol. 3, no. 1, 2008, pp. 1023. Wood and J. A. Stankovic, A Taxonomy for Denial-of-Service Attacks in Wireless Sensor Networks, chapter in Handbook of Sensor Networks: Compact Wireless and Wired Sensing Systems, M. Ilyas and I. Mahgoub, Eds., CRC Press, 2004. L. Buttyn and J.-P. Hubaux, Security and Cooperation in Wireless Networks: Thwarting Malicious and Selfish Behaviour in the Age of Ubiquitous Computing, Cam-bridge Univ. Press, 2008. R. Zhang and Y. Zhang, Wormhole-Resilient Secure Neighbor Discovery in Underwater Acoustic Networks, Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2010. Y. Liu, J. Jing, and J. Yang, Secure Underwater Acous-tic Communication Based on a Robust Key Generation Scheme, Proc. ICSP, 2008. F. Hu, S. Wilson, and Y. Xiao, Correlation-Based Securi-ty in Time Synchronization of Sensor Networks, Proc. IEEE WCNC, 2008. C. Tian et al., Tri-Message: A Lightweight Time Syn-chronization Protocol for High Latency and Resource-Constrained Networks, Proc. IEEE ICC, 2009. C. Tian et al., Localization and Synchronization for 3D Underwater Acoustic Sensor Networks, in Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing, LNCS, Springer, 2007, pp. 62231. N. Chirdchoo, W.-S. Soh, and K. Chua, MU-Sync: A Time Synchronization Protocol for Underwater Mobile Networks, Proc. WUWNet, 2008. H. Song, S. Zhu, and G. Cao, Attack-Resilient Time Synchronization for Wireless Sensor Networks, Ad Hoc Net., vol. 5, no. 1, 2007, pp. 11225. F. Hu et al., Vertical and Horizontal Synchronization Services with Outlier Detection in Underwater Acoustic Networks, Wireless Commun. Mobile Comp., vol. 8, no. 9, 2008, pp. 116581. M. Erol and S. Oktug, A Localization and Routing Framework for Mobile Underwater Sensor Networks, Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, Apr. 2008. W. Cheng et al., Underwater Localization in Sparse 3D Acoustic Sensor Networks, Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2008.


Z. Zhou, J.-H. Cui, and A. Bagtzoglou, Scalable Local-ization with Mobility Prediction for Underwater Sensor Networks, Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2008. Y. Zhou et al., A Range-free Localization Scheme for Large Scale Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks, J Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. (Science), vol. 14, no. 5, 2009, pp. 56268. M. C. Domingo and R. Prior, Design and Analysis of a GPS-Free Routing Protocol for Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks in Deep Water, Proc. UNWAT, 2007.