See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/4372741

Bluetooth performance improvement over different channels through

channel coding

Conference Paper · August 2008

DOI: 10.1109/SSD.2008.4632886 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS

3 180

6 authors, including:

Mohsen El-bendary Atef Elsayed Abouelazm

Helwan University Menoufia University, Faculty of Electronic Engineering
81 PUBLICATIONS   292 CITATIONS    97 PUBLICATIONS   435 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Nawal El-Fishawy Mostafa Eltokhy

Faculty of Electronic Eng., Menoufia University, Menouf, Egypt Helwan University, faculty of Industrial education
114 PUBLICATIONS   711 CITATIONS    63 PUBLICATIONS   138 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Cancelable Biometrics View project

Design of Radiation Detection System with Wireless Sensor Network View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Fathi E. Abd El-Samie on 01 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 2008 5th International Multi-Conference on Systems, Signals and Devices

BLUETOOTH PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT OVER DIFFERENT

CHANNELS THROUGH CHANNEL CODING

M. A. M. Mohamed El-Bendary**, A. E. Abu El-Azm*, N.A.El-Fishawy*, M. A. R. El-Tokhy**,

F. Shawky* and F. E. Abd El-Samie*
* Faculty Electronic Engineering, Menouf.
* *Faculty of Industrial Education, Helwan University
E-mails: mohsenbendary@yahoo.com, abouelazm_atef@yahoo.com, nelfishawy@hotmail.com,
farid_shawki@yahoo.com and fathi_sayed@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT networks (PANs) [6], where it provides wireless media to
connect and exchange information between devices.
It is known that Bluetooth systems employ a Hamming Bluetooth systems are designed for low power
(15, 10) code for error correction. In this paper, we consumption with short range distances up to 100 meters
propose different error correction coding schemes for this and operate with transmitted powers of 1 mw or 100 mw.
purpose. A comparison study between the Hamming (7, There are three classes of power consumption according
4), the cyclic (15, 11) and the BCH (15, 7) codes is held to the transmitted power. Class 1 has a 1 mw (0dBm)
in the paper to choose an alternative to the Hamming (15, transmitted power. In class 2, the transmitted power is 2.4
10) code. The simulation experiments are held over both mw (4dBm). On the other hand, class 3 has 100 mw
an Additive White Gaussian Noise (AWGN) channel and (20dBm) of transmitted power.
a Rayleigh fading channel. The experimental results
reveal the superiority of the BCH (15, 7) code to all other Several authors have analyzed the performance of
coding schemes if a large redundancy is accepted. If the Bluetooth systems with the Hamming (15, 10) code used
issue of redundancy is of major concern, the Hamming in the Bluetooth standard [7, 8]. In this paper, we
(7,4) code is the best. investigate the performance of Bluetooth systems with
different error control codes such as the Hamming (7, 4),
Keywords— block codes, Bluetooth, fading channels. the BCH (15, 7), and the cyclic (15, 11) codes. The
simulations are carried out over both an AWGN and
Rayleigh-flat fading channels [9, 10].

1. INTRODUCTION The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, the

Bluetooth is a short-range radio technology which
evolved as an alternative to cable connections. This
technology is specified in the IEEE 802.15.1 standard [1,
2]. Bluetooth was first referred to as a cable replacement
technology for interconnection cables. It provides a
universal wireless interface for different devices to
communicate with one another. The low cost and low
power of Bluetooth systems have fueled the popularity of
the Bluetooth technology , which has emerged as good
solution to interconnect different devices to form
personal area networks (PANs) [3].
Bluetooth operates in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz ISM
(Industrial-Scientific-Medical) frequency band, which is
also utilized by various wireless and radio technologies,
such as IEEE 802.11b/g standard [4], IEEE 802.15.4
standard [5], cordless telephones, and even microwave
ovens. Bluetooth employs the Frequency Hopping Spread
Spectrum (FHSS) technique to mitigate the interferences
caused by other wireless services, coexisting in the 2.4
GHz frequency band. The Bluetooth technology presents
the industrial specifications of wireless personal area
Bluetooth packet format is discussed. Section 3
highlights the issue of channel coding in Bluetooth
systems. The proposed modifications are presented in
section 4. The simulation assumptions are given in
section 5. The simulation results are introduced in section
6. Finally, the paper is concluded in section 7.
2. BLUETOOTH SYSTEMS
Bluetooth systems, architectures, and protocols are
defined in [13]. In these systems, the upper layers data is
passed down to the baseband and the radio layers where
it is segmented into packets and transmitted over the air
interface. Information is modulated at the rate of 1 Mbps
and transmitted in one of 79 channels. Each one of these
channels has a 1 MHz bandwidth in the 2.402-2.480 GHz
band. Signals are frequency hopped through the 79
channels at the rate of 1600 hops per second with one
hop per time slot, making the length of each time slot 625
micro seconds.
Bluetooth packets have three major data fields. The
first is a 72-bits Access (AC) field that consists of a 4 bit

978-1-4244-2206-7/08/$25.00 ©2008 IEEE

preamble, a 64-bits sync word, and a 4-bit trailer. The
AC provides a means of synchronization and
identification. The AC identifies all packets exchanged
within a piconet, which is a collection of Bluetooth
devices associated with the same master device. An 18-
bits header (HD) follows the AC field. The HD contains
the retransmission and flow control information.
The Payload (PL) follows the HD and contains from 0
to 2745 bits. The PL data may or may not be protected by
FEC, depending on the packet type. In this paper, we are
restricted to Asynchronous Connectionless (ACL)
packets. These packets have two types; coded packets
(DMx) and uncoded packets (DHx), where x= 1, 3, 5 and
it denotes the number of time slots between two
consecutive hops [11, 12].
3. CHANNEL CODING IN BLUETOOTH
SYSTEMS
Channel coding is mostly accomplished by selectively
introducing redundant bits into the transmitted
information stream. These additional bits will allow the
detection and correction of bit errors in the received data
streams and provide more reliable information
transmission [14].
For Bluetooth systems, many FEC schemes are
defined. The purpose of these schemes is to reduce the
number of retransmissions.
In this section, we introduce the types of channel
coding which are used in Bluetooth systems, especially
for ACL packets. First, the AC field is coded by the BCH
(64, 30) code which has 34 parity bits and can correct up
to 6 errors. The second field of the Bluetooth packet is
coded by a repetition (3,1) code which can correct a
single error [15].
The payload is the last field of the Bluetooth packet
which may be coed or uncoded. Coded payloads employ
the Hamming (15, 10) code which can correct a single
error and detect two errors.
4. THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS
In this paper, we will analyze the performance of
Bluetooth systems with different types of block codes
over AWGN and Rayleigh-flat fading channels. This
section proposes the usage of different block codes in
Bluetooth systems instead of Hamming (15, 10) code.
The codes are the Hamming (7, 4), the BCH (15, 7), and
the cyclic (15, 11) codes. These codes are used for
payload coding. No modifications are performed in the
other fields.
5. THE SIMULATION ASSUMPTIONS
In this section, the simulation environment used for
comparison between the traditional Bluetooth system and
the proposed modifications of this system is described.
The modulation technique used for data transmission
in our simulation experiments is the Binary Phase Shift
Keying (BPSK) scheme instead of the Gaussian
Frequency Shift Keying (GFSK) scheme which is
implemented in the standard Bluetooth system. This is
attributed to the simplicity of BPSK.
The Monte Carlo simulation method is used in the
simulation experiments to compare between the
traditional Hamming (15, 10) code used in the standard
Bluetooth packet and the proposed coding schemes. This
method ensures obtaining correct statistical results.
An important assumption used in the simulation is
that a packet is discarded if there is an error in the AC,
HD, or PL (after decoding) which was not corrected
using the error correction scheme. This is a realistic
assumption to simulate the real Bluetooth systems
operation.
In this simulation, hard decision is assumed at the
receiver in the decoding process for all channel codes. In
the simulation, the interference effects are neglected.
The packets lengths in all experiments are kept fixed for
all coding schemes. This is at the expense of payload
lengths.
In some simulation experiments, a block fading
channel is assumed. It is a slow and frequency
nonselective channel, where symbols in a block undergo
a constant fading effect. The fading coefficients are
uncorrelated from block to block regardless of the length
of the block. This means that the fading is constant over
one hop, and independent from hop to hop. Rayleigh
fading statistics are also considered. These statistics
represent the case of non-line-of-sight links [16].
6. THE SIMULATION RESULTS
In this section, several experiments are carried out for
the purpose of comparison between the proposed coding
schemes and the traditional coding scheme in Bluetooth
systems. The simulation parameters described in the
previous section are used.
The first and second experiments simulate the
transmission of coded (DMx) and uncoded (DHx) packets
over an AWGN channel, respectively. The coding is
implemented using the standard Hamming (15, 10) code.
The results of these experiments shown in Figs (1) and
(2) indicate that the DMx packets are preferred to the DHx
packets if the error correction is of major concern.
 0
10 0
10

-1
10 -1
10
Packets Error Rate

Packet Error Rate

-2
10 -2
10

-3
10 -3
10
DH1 Packets
DH3 Packets DH1 Packets
DH5 Packets DH3 Packets
-4 DH5 Packets
10 -4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10
10 15 20 25 30 35
Eb/No (dB)
Eb/No(dB)

Fig. (1). PER vs. SNR for DHx packets over

AWGN channel
Fig. (3). PER vs. SNR for DHx packets over
Rayleigh-flat fading channel

0
10

-1
10
Packet Error Rate

-2
10

-3
10
DM1 Packets
DM3 Packets
DM5 Packets
-4
10
10 15 20 25 30 35
Eb/No (dB)

Fig. (2). PER vs. SNR for DMx packets over

AWGN channel Fig. (4). PER vs. SNR for DMx packets over Rayleigh-
flat fading channel

As shown in Figs. (1) and (2), shorter Bluetooth

packets perform better than longer ones.
The first two experiments are repeated for a
Rayleigh-flat fading channel rather than an AWGN
channel. The results are shown in Figs.(3) and (4).
These results ensure the preference DMx packets to
DHx packets and the preference of shorter packets to
longer ones, even in the case of fading channels.
Other experiments are carried out to test the
performance of the proposed coding schemes over an
AWGN channel and compare them to the traditional
Hamming (15, 10) coding scheme for DM1, DM3, and
DM5, respectively. The results are shown in Figs. (5), (6),
and (7).
 0
10
These results show that the BCH (15, 7) code is
preferred when the redundancy can be tolerated and the
-1
major concern is to achieve a low Packet Error Rate
10 (PER). If shorter codes are to be used to reduce the
redundancy, the Hamming (7, 4) code is to be used. If an
Packets Error Rate

approximately similar packet length as the standard

-2
10 Bluetooth packet format is required, the cyclic (15, 11)
DH1 Packets
DM1 Packets
code can be used with a lower redundancy than the
Hamm(15,10) standard scheme.
DM1 Packets
-3
10 (cyclic(15,11)
DM1 Packets Similar experiments over a Rayleigh-flat fading
Hamm(7,4)
DM1 Packets
channel are carried out and results are shown in Figs. (8),
-4
(BCH(15,7)) (9), and (10). These figures ensure the same conclusion
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 obtained from Figs. (5), (6), and (7).
Eb/No(dB)

Fig. (5). PER vs. SNR for DM1 and DH1 over
AWGN channel

0
0 10
10

-1
-1 10
10
Packet Error Rate
Packets Error Rate

-2
-2 10
10
DH1 Packets
DH3 Packets
DM1 Packets
DM3 Packets
Hamm(15,10)
Hamm(15,10)
DM1 Packets
DM3 Packets -3
-3 10 cycl.(15,11)
10 (cyclic(15,11)
DM1 Packets
DM3 Packets
Hamm(7,4)
Hamm(7,4)
DM1 Packets
DM3 Packets
BCH(15,7)
(BCH(15,7)) -4
-4 10
10 10 15 20 25 30 35
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Eb/No(dB) Eb/No (dB)

Fig. (6). PER vs. SNR for DM3 and DH3 over Fig. (8). PER vs. SNR for DM1 and DH1 packets over
AWGN channel Rayleigh- flat fading channel
0 0
10 10

-1 -1
10 10
Packets Error Rate

Packet Error Rate

-2 -2
10 10
DH5 Packets DH3 Packets
DM5 Packets DM3 Packets
Hamm(15,10) Hamm(15,10)
DM5 Packets DM3 Packets
-3
10 (cyclic(15,11) 10
-3
cyclic(15,11)
DM5 Packets DM3 Packets
Hamm(7,4) Hamm(7,4)
DM5 Packets DM3 Packets
(BCH(15,7)) BCH(15,7)
-4
10 10
-4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
10 15 20 25 30 35
Eb/No(dB) Eb/No (dB)

Fig. (7). PER vs. SNR for DM5and DH5 over Fig. (9). PER vs. SNR for DM3 and DH3 packets over
AWGN channel Rayleigh- flat fading channel
 [5] “IEEE 802.11, the working group setting the standards for
wireless LANS,” http:// grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/11.
[6] Bluetooth Special Interest Group, “Specifications of the
10
0 Bluetooth System”, Version 1.1, January 2001.
[7] S. Galli. D. Famolari, T. Kodama, “Bluetooth: Channel
Coding Considerations”, IEEE Vehicular Technology
Conference, 2004.
10
-1
[8] N. Golmie, R.E. Van Dck, A. Soltanian, “Interference of
Bluetooth and IEEE 802.11: Simulation Modeling and
Packet Error Rate

Performance Evaluation”, Proceedings ACM Int. Workshop on

Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile
-2
10 Systems, Italy, 2001.
DH5 Packets
DM5 Packets
[9] T.Y. Chui, F. Thaler, W.G. Scanlon, “A Novel Channel
Hamm(15,10) Modeling Technique for Performance Analysis of Bluetooth
-3
DM5 Packets Baseband Packets”, Proceedings of the IEEE ICC Conference,
10 cyclic(15,11)
New York, 2002.
DM5 Packets
Hamm(7,4) [10] J.C. Haartsen, S. Zürbes, “Bluetooth Voice and Data
DM5 Packets Performance in 802.11 DS WLAN Environment”, Ericsson
BCH(15,7) Report, 1999.
-4
10
10 15 20 25 30 35 [11] I. Howitt, “WLAN and WPAN Coexistence in UL Band”,
Eb/No(dB) IEEE Trans. on Vehicular Technology, vol. 50, No 4, 2001.
[12] A. Conti, D. Dardari, G. Paolini, O. Andrisano,
Fig. (10). PER vs. SNR for DM5 and DH5 packets “Bluetooth and IEEE 802.11b Coexistence: Analytical
over Rayleigh- flat fading channel Performance Evaluation in Fading Channels”, IEEE trans.
Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 21, No 2, .2003.
[13] Specification of Bluetooth system, volume 2, version 1.1,
These previous simulation experiments reveal that February 22, 2001.
cyclic (15, 11) and the Hamming (15, 10) codes give very [14] B. P. Lathi , Modern digital and analog communication
close result. DMx packets performances are improved systems, 2nd edition , Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
compared to DHx packets by using the BCH (15, 7) [15] Emad N. Farag, Mohamed I Elmasry, Mixed Signal VLSI
code, while tolerating the redundancy bits. Wireless Design Circuits and System, 1st Edition, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, 1999.
[16] L. Ozarow, S. Shamai, and A.D. Wyner, “Information
theoretic considerations for cellar mobile radio,” IEEE Trans.
Veh. Tech., vol. 43, pp, 359-378, 1994.
7. CONCLUSION

This paper has studied several coding schemes and

implemented them as alternatives for coding the PL field
in Bluetooth packets. A comparison study between the
standard Hamming (15, 10) code and the proposed codes
is held.
The results reveal the superiority of BCH (15, 7) code
in error correction and the Hamming (7, 4) code in
achieving a small redundancy. The cyclic (15, 11) code
can be used if a shorter redundancy is required while
leaving the packet with the same length to obtain the
same performance as that of the Hamming (15, 10) code.

8. REFERENCES

[1] M. A. M. Mohamed, A. Abou El-Azm, N. El-Fishwy, M.

A. R. El-Tokhy, F. E. Abd El-Samie,” Optimization of
Bluetooth Packet Format for Efficient Performance,” Progress
in Electromagnetic Research M, Vol. 1, 101-110, 2008
[2] “IEEE 802.15.4 Wpan-Ir Task Group,” http://
ww.ieee802.org/15/pub/TG4.html.
[3] “IEEE 802.15 Wpan taskgroup 1 (tg), ”
http://www.ieee.802.org/15/pub/TG1.html
[4] P.Johansson, R. Kapoor, M. Kazantzidis, and M. Gerla,
“Bluetooth: An enabler for personal area networking,” IEEE
Network Magazine, Sept/Oct 2001.

View publication stats