Power Allocation for Reliable and Energy-Efficient Optical LEO-to-Ground Downlinks with Hybrid ARQ Schemes
Satellites in low earth orbit (LEO) are currently being deployed for numerous communication, positioning, space and Earth-imaging missions. To provide higher data rates in direct-to-user links and earth observation downlinks, the free-space optics technology can be employed for LEO-to-ground downlin...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Photonics 2022-02, Vol.9 (2), p.92 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Satellites in low earth orbit (LEO) are currently being deployed for numerous communication, positioning, space and Earth-imaging missions. To provide higher data rates in direct-to-user links and earth observation downlinks, the free-space optics technology can be employed for LEO-to-ground downlinks. Moreover, the hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) can be adopted since the propagation latency is low for LEO satellites. In this work, a power allocation methodology is proposed for optical LEO-to-ground downlinks under weak turbulence employing HARQ retransmission schemes. Specifically, the average power consumption is minimized given a maximum transmitted power constraint and a target outage probability threshold to ensure energy efficiency and reliability, respectively. The optimization problem is formulated as a constrained nonlinear programming problem and solved for Type I HARQ, chase combining (CC) and incremental redundancy (IR) schemes. The solutions are derived numerically via iterative algorithms, namely interior-point (IP) and sequential quadratic programming (SQP), and validated through an exhaustive (brute-force) search. The numerical simulations provide insight into the performance of the retransmission schemes regarding average power. More specifically, Type I HARQ has the worst output, CC has a moderate one, and IR exhibits the best performance. Finally, the IP algorithm is a slower but more accurate solver, and SQP is faster but slightly less accurate. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2304-6732 2304-6732 |
DOI: | 10.3390/photonics9020092 |