Performance Analysis of Indoor MIMO Visible

Light Communication Systems
Ngoc-Anh Tran, Duy A. Luong, Truong C. Thang, and Anh T. Pham
Computer Communications Lab., University of Aizu
Aizuwakamatsu, Fukushima, Japan 965-8580
Emaill:{sI180247.m5172106.thang. pham}@u-aizu.ac.jp

Abstract-In this paper, we study the performance of Repeti­

stemmed from multi path propagation, which both significantly
degrade the system performance. It is important to note that
in current and foreseen lighting technology, diffused system
have been being essential for indoor scenarios [6].
In order to provide sufficient illumination, multiple LEDs
arrays are usually deployed, thus the utilization of multiple­
input-multiple-output (MIMO) systems in VLC is ready to
be realized. In optical wireless communications (OWC) with
outdoor scenarios, the use of MIMO systems can substantially
improve the system performance by providing the spatial
diversity gain [7]. Nevertheless, in indoor scenarios the fading
effects caused atmospheric turbulence does not present, thus
the use of classical MIMO transmission scheme of repetition
code (RC) can only provide a minor diversity gain. On the
other aspect, by means of spatial multiplexing gain, two other
well-known MIMO schemes Spatial Modulation (SM) and
Spatial Multiplexing (SMP) can offer substantial performance
improvement [8]-[10]. In VLC, SM and SMP are expected to
be an effective and low-complexity solution for realizing the
benefit of MIMO technique [II].
In this regard, in [10] the BER performance of three above
MIMO techniques are compared in various scenarios including
different transmitter spacing, link blockage and imbalance
power. In each case, the BER is derived in terms of electrical
signal-to-noise ratio and different level of spectral efficiencies.
However, the NLOS was not considered in this study. As a
result, the effects of reflection and lSI phenomenon is ignored
in the calculations. Moreover, the consideration of a quite
small transmitter spacing (ranging from 0.2 m to 0.7 m)
together with the assumption of signal independent receiver
noise make the system far from the practical lighting systems.
These factors raise the channel gain matrix to the region of
10-4 and, thus, do not reflect the high path loss property of
an actual indoor VLC link.
Therefore, in this paper, we apply two MIMO techniques
SMP and RC to NLOS VLC for a 5 m x 5 m x 3 m room. The
receiver noise is modeled as a AW GN noise taking to account
thermal noise, signal-dependent shot noise and lSI power. It is
worth noting that the BER strongly depends on the location of
the receiver, hence it is important to examine the distribution
of the achievable BER within the room. Additionally, the
normalized area in which the system performance falls below a
required BER level is considered in order to find the optimum
transmitter separation. We also compare SMP and RC in terms

tion Code (RC) and Spatial Multiplexing (SMP) applied to Visible
Light Communication (VLC) in indoor scenarios with non-direct
line-of-sight (LOS) characteristics. Considering a VLC MIMO

system with 4 transmitters within a typical 5 m x 5 m x 3 m
room, by means of simulation, we investigate the distribution of
Bit-error-rate (BER) when the receiver moves around the room.
For various transmitter separations, the normalized area at which
the system performance does not satisfy a required BER level is
illustrated. The optimal values of transmitter separation for RC

and SMP are 1.5 m and 3.5 m, respectively. Comparing between
RC and SMP, the results show that RC outperforms SMP
at low spectral efficiency. However, at relatively high spectral
efficiency RC does not perform well since it requires a very high
constellation size, while SMP with its spatial multiplexing gain
can offer a much better performance.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Over the past decade or so, solid state lighting technology
using light emitting diodes (LEDs) has emerged as a promising
illumination solution for both commercial and home uses.
It is expected that LED lighting will progressively replace
conventional phosphorescent light bulbs and incandescent
lamps due to its advantages of lower power consumption,
longer lifetime, non-toxic and safety from eavesdropper [I],
[2]. In addition, thanks to the fast-switching property, LED
can also be used as a transmitter for data transmission, and
this technology is referred to as Visible light communications
(VLC). Especially, in typical indoor scenarios, e.g. office or
home, VLC is expected as a strong contender to WiFi for
home networking and a reliable successor in case of the use
of WiFi is concerned.
The indoor VLC however has to overcome several major
challenges, including limited bandwidth of white LEDs, severe
path loss, multi-path dispersion and unavoidable background
light noise [3], [4]. Moreover, performance of VLC systems
strongly depends on the link configurations. In general, there
are two main types of link configurations which are non-direct
line-of-sight (NLOS), namely diffused link, and direct line-of­
sight (LOS). LOS systems with their directionality are able to
offer a high bit-rate up to several Gbps [5], however the system
is sensitive to the link blockage. On the other hand, in diffused
VLC systems the signal propagates from the transmitter to
the receiver by several paths making the system more robust
to link blockage and moving objects. This comes with the
expenses of higher path loss and inter symbol interference

978-1-4799-5051-5/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE

60

RC together with M-PAM can achieve a bandwidth efficiency of log2 (M) bits/s/Hz. n is total noise vector. As each LED chip is small and close enough to others in same array. 1j. The intensity levels in M-PAM is given as [10] where Hij represents the channel gain on VLC link from the 2 Is . such as a router or a laptop computer. the receiver noise variance is treated as a combination of thermal noise.unipolar /vI level pulse amplitude modulation (M-PAM) is chosen thanks to its suit­ (2) ability with IMIDD channel and higher bandwidth efficiency compared to other modulation scheme such as OOK. we can assume that all optical signals coming from a same source can be synchronized and well­ represented by one point at the center of that LEDs array. The received signal vector can be expressed as H x + { where D1. Four LED arrays are hanged on the ceiling at the height of 2. Four receivers are located at the table height z = 0. we only consider up to the first order reflection. m is the order of l . Section III presents SMP and RC principle and then BER performance is derived. Since the non-direct LOS link is assumed. Receiver Noises with lSI In our system. Section IV results are shown. The shot noise variance CTshot and thermal noise variance CTthermal are given in [1].. Q M -1 JSINR) . section V concludes the paper.75 m and aligned 2 by 2 on 10 cm x 10 cm plane which is small enough to enable mobility and possibility of integration into usual end-to-end devices. a and jJ are described in the right side of Fig. PAM (7) 1m = /vI 1 m wIth m = 0. RC is the simplest MIMO techniques in which all trans­ mitters simultaneously transmit the same signal. the noise power spectral density is summarized by No = ( CT . D2 .1). where Is is mean emitted optical power. BER DERIVATION [. ( /vI . Consequently..r S we 0. Therefore. Finally. RC and SMP. XN. 1. are deployed.l. respectively. For by the selection of modulation scheme.hermal . The VLC channel with 4 transmitters (Nt = 4) and 4 y = = £00 h(t) ® x(t)dt. we consider a room with the dimension of 5m x 5m x 3m. 1.. -2 (8) Here. ° � 1) � We.] T denotes transpose operator. (6) where r is electrical optical conversion efficiency of photo­ detector and E is the bandwidth.) cos(1)) 0.1 ) 1 -. 0 S 1j. L����2 pdArej cos(a) cos(jJ) cosm(¢r)Ts(1)r) 1 2 cos(1)r ) . VLC Channel Model n . Each component in the channel matrix Hcan be given as _ Hij = walls �Hd + � dHrej. large values of both transmitter semiangle <1:>1/2 (at half power) and field-of-view (FOV) semiangle W 1/2 of the receiver are chosen. In this case. The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: Section II introduce the system model with VLC link profile and the receiver noise. (I) where x = [ Xl . 1Pr > We B. as receivers.of the BER performance for different efficiency levels. II. The BER can be calculated as [3] (3) where the DC gain on the directed path Hd is described in [I] as Hd = {(�. H In this section. SY STEM Continuously.. . ith transmitter to the jth receiver. and N r photo-detectors. The received lSI power can be given as HSI = receivers (Nr = 4) is described in Fig. For the sake of convenient calculation. lSI phenomenon should be taken into account. shot noise and lSI power. respectively. PPM or PWM. thus the longest path length difference between the longest reflected and directed path can exceed 3 meters. ] T is the transmitted signal vector where III. we analyze the BER of indoor VLC chan­ indicates the channel transmission matrix and can be given nel considering two MIMO techniques. which are 60 and 75 degrees.50 m from the ground and their separation will be investigated for the optimal value in Section IV. + CT hot + r2 Pi�i)/ E. Mlog2 M. SINR is electrical signal to interference and noise ratio after being combined from Nr received signals by applying n��) 1/2 61 . Finally. as transmitters. " BERRC (4) A and 1� (1)) are the physical area of the photodetector and gain of optical filter. (5) where h(t) is the inverse Fourier transform of Hand ® denotes the convolution operator. the delay becomes comparable to the symbol duration at the bit-rate of interest. We consider a MIMO indoor VLC system with intensity modulation and direct detection (IMIDD) where Nt LEDs arrays. . > We . Lambertian emission and related to <1:>1/2 as m = I n ( co s )) = ( 2(M .::-�lA cosm(¢)Ts(1j. Channel gain corresponding to each small reflective area dArej is calculated as dHrej M ODEL A.8 corresponding to the plaster surface. we assume the surface reflector coefficient p = 0.

the BER increases severely when the receiver locates near walls and comers of the room. 62 . Then. Here S'J denotes the desired BER level and it can be 10-3 with the use of FEC or 10-4 as the requirement of a typical wireless link.bm(2») is the number of bit errors when pair­ wise error happens between Xm(1) and Xm(2).� . I V. each transmitter transmits independent data stream simultaneously. 5m 0. B. occupies at least 5% entire room's area with SMP. The transmitted electrical power from each LEDs array is assumed to be 13 W and the bandwidth efficiency is R = 4 bits/s/Hz.. SMP achieves the bandwidth efficiency of R = Nt *log2 (M) bits/s/Hz with M-PAM modulation scheme. SMP offers the spatial multiplexing gain.) indicates the Hamming distance of two bit assignments corresponding to two concerned signal vectors. We can see that RC can completely satisfy the requirement of S'J = 10-3 (10) where II. pairwise error probability (PEP) is the probability that the receiver erroneously detects the signal from other transmitters.1 X 10-3 A A. The normalized area with BER 2>: 10-3. For SMP. l: Geometrically model of Indoor VLC channel with reflection maximum ratio combining (MRC). the BER is well­ approximated by where dH(.. the bandwidth B = 100 MHz and the efficiency R = 4 bits/s/Hz are selected. to provide the same spectral efficiency SMP needs much lower constellation size than RC. BER Distribution Figure 2 illustrates the distribution of BER when the re­ ceiver moves within the room where the transmitter separation dTX = 2. we chose the position of LED arrays on purpose of having an ideal alignment of LEDs-to­ LEDs and LEDs-to-walls. hij Nt system. where the BER is considered to be unsatisfied. As expected.TX � X-'. 2 .75 "" . Thus.IIF denotes Frobenius norm.5 m. This configuration needs relatively high power to ob­ tain uniform VLC link quality. the relationship between the normalized area with BER2>: S'J and dTX is investigated in Fig 3. 5m --------''-'' Fig.. Regarding SMP.. SMP requires sufficient low correlation among active data streams. when the receiver locates right under the source BER becomes very low and the worst BER appears at the corner of room. The PEP in which Xm(2) is erroneously detected while Xm(l) is actually transmitted can be derived as [10] I Notation PLED z= Adct n T hg I Value 10 mW 1 cm 2 1. Precisely. With a Nr we obtain SINR as given in [10] SINRMRC F = N o Nr :�l 8 x ( ) Nt f. (9) TABLE I: System parameters Parameter where PTX = ( r1�hx)2 is the average emitted electrical power where 1� is symbol duration. to gain those high values. LEDs chip power Total photo-detector area Refractive index OlE conversion efficiency Background current In the case of SMP. Thus. dH(bm(1).-�_d--T-"-- ¢" : ¢i a Reflective point {J D 2 D 2 � 1/lri . However. it offers wide range of BER value due to the sensitivity to different transmitter receiver alignments.. In contrast to RC.. Therefore. Transceiver Optimal Positions In the previous discussion.5 1 5. DISCUSSIONS NUM ERICAL RESULT S AND Some major parameters used in our calculation are listed in Table I. In case of RC.

. Walewski.26. The result shows that to achieve BER below 10-3. ISBN: 978-953-51-0784-2. SMP with its spatial multiplexing gain is shown to be a promising solution to provide high efficiency with low complexity in the presence of high data-rate demandings. 244054. Komine. M. 'Fundamental analysis for visible-light communication system using LED lights.M.24.2819. Mohsen. G. pp. T.15.2813. no. M. S'J versus the separa­ tion of transmitter when dTX = 3.com/books/optical­ communication/multiple-input-multiple-output-mimo-optical-wireless­ communications [5] Akbulut. The optimal value of dTX in RC and SMP is recognized as 1.I07. Jan.. In figure 4.... S. T. while SMP with its spatial multiplexing gain only have to work on 4-PAM to achieve the same bit-rate. 4: BER versus Pave at the comer of room with dTXnc 1. respectively. On the other hand.6. However. pp.0 .3883. "BER Performance of Free-Space Optical Transmission with Spatial Diversity. . TEEE .5 m and 3. " 0. Multiple-Input Multiple-Output (MIMO) Optical Wireless Communications. needs much higher constellation size. vo1.com/books/advanced-trends-in-wireless­ communications/visible-light-communication [7] Navidpour.85. no. SMP shows much better performance than RC. Randel. Chen. This fact can be explained that RC 63 . ''· 'V In this paper..13.06109 dTX Transmitter separation Fig. Mutamed Khatib (Ed. 2001 [6] C.. M. Il 32 '0 . it is seen that RC can only perform well is the case of low efficiency. "Broadband In­ formation Broadcasting Using LED-Based Interior Lighting.3892. SMP needs more transmitted power than RC when R = 4 bits/s/Hz.. [2] Tanaka. Visible Light Communication.5772/46079. J.M. 2003." Photonics Technology Letters." Wireless Communications. IEEE Transactions on . .0 m with the same actual bit-rate. "" .). M. Y. J. J.5 m. 'V. E86-B. Haruyama. R 100MHz dTX = 2. c." TEICE Trans.:." Consumer Electronics.1109/TWC. Weiner. Dr. 6 10- 1E-25 -2 -2.5 m Pave = 9 W.87. 36 Fig. at a higher efficiency. August 2007 doi: 1O.. no.. no. pp. in this case lvI = 256. InTech. Available from: http://www. K. we plot the BER when the receiver is located at the comer of room with two different efficiencies but the same actual bit-rate. ..l. Langer. "0 rn E 0. Optical Communication. The results showed how the BER variates within the room and therefore the optimal transmitter separation was found.M. Woodall. Lee (2011)..w.15 � o. pp. ISBN: 978-953-307-183-1.8. Dr. 2008 [4] Oswaldo Gonzalez (2012).I.R. InTech. no.. Uysal.).50. Nakagawa. Hargis.. 2: BER distribution with RC & SMP. M. vo1. "Digital communications above I Gb/s using 890-nm surface-emitting light-emitting diodes. Dec.. 4 at B Fig. Melloch.2007. H.5 m.. vo1. i. IEEE Transactions on . A. 8.52 8 10- 12 a 24 20 16 Pave for each array (W) 0 ' 28 0.-D. R = 8 bits/s/Hz. Nakagawa.10 ' 1E-5 () a: 1E-10 I a: w 1E-15 en ffi tIl 1E-20 4 10- o. we have investigated the performance of VLC systems with two MIMO techniques RC and SMP in non­ direct LOS environment. Commun. Aug. C..intechopen. pp..intechopen. vol. M.5 m and dTXSMP = 1. Regarding MIMO techniques. S. V. DOl: 10. [3] Grubor. "Indoor Visible Light Data Transmission System Utilizing White LED Lights.'<1 " CONCLUSIONS " REFERENCES [I] Komine.e. 3: The normalized area with BER:.. Joumal of . Figure 3 also shows that RC outperforms to SMP at low efficiency R = 4 bits/s/Hz.� 0." Lightwave Technology. That result is verified when we examine a certain position. Narot­ tam Das (Ed.. from: Available http://www. Advanced Trends in Wireless Communications. S. Feb 2004..100. Kavehrad.. vo1.

pp. H. "Indoor MIMO Optical Wireless Communication Using Spatial Modulation.. Hanzo.5502062 [9] Fath. H. vo1. Jan. Haas. Di Renzo. 23-27 May 2010 doi: 1O. R. H.2287851 .... T.. Elgala.56. Ghrayeb. "Performance Comparison of MIMO Techniques for Optical Wireless Communications in Indoor Environments. H. no. R.103. and Implementation. Opportunities. M.. M. T.102.[8] Mesleh.2." Communi­ cations....1109/ICC.. Mehmood. H. no. pp. vol.2013. Mesleh.201O. no. 2011 64 [10] Fath." Communications (TCC).5. vol. 2011 IEEE . A. February 2013 [11] Di Renzo. pp.. 2010 IEEE Intemational Conference on .1109/JPROC.1...5..l.. IEEE Transactions on . pp. "Spatial Modulatiou Applied to Optical Wireless Commuuicatious in Indoor LOS Environ­ ments. Haas.. Sugiura. no.. Haas. S. "Spatial Modulation for Generalized MIMO: Challenges.742. L.61. 2014 doi: 10. vol." Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM 2011)." Proceedings of the IEEE .l.733. Haas. R. 5-9 Dec.