Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

Optimizing Indoor Visible Light Communication

Systems: A Comparative Analysis of Multi-LED
Configurations
Sharmina Rahman1; Farida Siddiqi Prity2; Md. Abdullah Bin Masud3
1,3
Dept. of CSE & CSIT, Shanto-Mariam University of Creative Technology, Uttara, Dhaka
2
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Netrokona University, Bangladesh

Publication Date: 2025/05/12

Abstract; Visible Light Communication (VLC) utilizes LEDs to transmit data through visible light, offering an alternative
to traditional RF systems. This study develops a model for indoor VLC environments, focusing on key factors such as
illuminance distribution, received power, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in both line-of-sight (LOS) and non-line-of-sight
(NLOS) conditions. The research examines how different transmitter setups—single, four, and five LED configurations—
affect system performance, with particular attention to the bit error rate (BER) for two modulation schemes: On-Off Keying
(OOK) and Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (16-QAM). The findings show that multi-LED setups provide enhanced
reliability, especially in diffuse propagation scenarios common in NLOS environments. Multi-LED configurations deliver
better illuminance distribution and higher SNR, making them suitable for complex indoor environments. However, single-
LED setups offer lower BER at higher SNR levels, demonstrating superior performance for simpler setups where direct
communication paths are available. The study also compares modulation schemes, finding that OOK is more resilient to
noise and achieves lower BER, particularly in single-LED configurations, while 16-QAM offers higher data throughput but
is more susceptible to errors in lower SNR conditions. The trade-offs between wider coverage and increased BER in multi-
LED setups indicate that configuration must be tailored to specific environmental conditions and system goals. This research
contributes to the optimization of VLC systems, suggesting that while multi-LED setups are better suited for complex
environments requiring broader coverage, single-LED configurations are more efficient in simpler scenarios where
minimizing errors is crucial. The study's insights are expected to facilitate the wider adoption of VLC technology,
particularly in secure indoor communication systems where RF signals face challenges like interference and limited
bandwidth.

Keywords: Visible Light Communication; LED; Line-of-Sight; Non-Line-of-Sight; Modulation

How to Cite: Sharmina Rahman; Farida Siddiqi Prity; Md. Abdullah Bin Masud (2025). Optimizing Indoor Visible Light
Communication Systems: A Comparative Analysis of Multi-LED Configurations. International Journal of Innovative Science and
Research Technology, 10(4), 3315-3344. https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

I. INTRODUCTION The necessity of VLC in indoor environments arises

from its ability to seamlessly integrate with existing lighting
Visible Light Communication represents a cutting-edge infrastructure while offering enhanced communication
technology that leverages visible light to transmit data capabilities[5]. Traditional RF systems can be prone to signal
wirelessly, offering a promising alternative to traditional degradation and security vulnerabilities, especially in densely
radio frequency (RF) communication systems [1]. VLC populated areas or in settings where multiple devices compete
operates within the visible spectrum (approximately 400 to for bandwidth. VLC addresses these challenges by using
700 nanometers) and utilizes light sources such as Light light, a medium that is both abundant and already integrated
Emitting Diodes (LEDs) to deliver high-speed data into most indoor spaces through lighting systems[4].
transmission [2]. This form of communication is particularly Additionally, since light does not penetrate walls, VLC offers
advantageous in indoor environments where RF signals often an inherent level of security, as the communication is
suffer from limitations such as interference, congestion, and confined to the room where the light is present. This makes
limited bandwidth. VLC, by contrast, can provide a high data VLC particularly suitable for environments that require high
transmission rate, robust security, and minimal interference, levels of data security, such as offices, hospitals, and
making it an ideal choice for a wide range of applications, government buildings[6].
including smart lighting systems, indoor navigation, and
secure communication networks[3]. The role of LEDs in VLC is crucial. LEDs are highly
efficient light sources that can rapidly switch on and off, a

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3315

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
capability that is essential for modulating data in VLC transmission in VLC systems. The BER will be calculated for
systems[7]. Unlike traditional incandescent or fluorescent two modulation schemes: On-Off Keying (OOK), a simple
bulbs, LEDs can operate at high speeds, enabling them to modulation technique where data is represented by the
transmit data without noticeable flicker to the human eye[8]. presence or absence of light, and 16-bit Quadrature
Furthermore, LEDs offer the flexibility of dual Amplitude Modulation (16-QAM), a more complex
functionality—they can illuminate spaces while modulation scheme that uses different amplitude and phase
simultaneously serving as communication transmitters, shifts to encode data. The comparison of these two
thereby optimizing energy use and reducing the need for modulation techniques will provide a deeper understanding
additional hardware[9]. Therefore, this study aims to develop of how different modulation strategies impact the
a comprehensive model for indoor VLC environments using performance and reliability of VLC in indoor environments.
LED technology. The research focuses on analyzing
fundamental characteristics such as illuminance distribution, This study aims to advance the understanding of VLC
received power, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) to technology in indoor environments by developing a detailed
understand the impact of different propagation scenarios, model that considers various factors affecting performance.
including line-of-sight (LOS) and diffuse propagation. The findings of this research are expected to contribute to the
Specifically, the study explores the effects of diffuse optimization of VLC systems, enabling their wider adoption
transmission through walls and how this influences the bit in indoor communication networks.
error rate (BER) in VLC systems.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
To achieve these objectives, the research has been
structured around several key tasks: The literature review on visible light communication
(VLC) systems presents a range of methodologies and
 Developing an Indoor VLC Model: contributions from various researchers aimed at enhancing
This involves creating a model that accurately illustrates the performance and reliability of VLC in indoor
the distribution of illuminance for various transmitter environments. Younus et al. [11] explored multi-beam
configurations, including single, four, and five transmitter transmitters (MBTs) with wide field-of-view (W-FOV) and
setups. The model also accounts for different receiver automatic device recognition (ADR) through experimental
positions within the indoor environment to evaluate how the setups and simulations, demonstrating that MBTs
placement of both transmitters and receivers affects overall significantly reduce signal fading, which is crucial for
system performance. designing reliable indoor VLC systems. Similarly, Vipul
Dixit et al. [12] employed simulation and analytical methods
 Determining Received Power: to evaluate adaptive diversity techniques (ADT) in indoor
The study establishes the relationship between VLC systems, revealing that ADT can improve bit error rate
brightness and illuminance to determine the received power (BER) by mitigating signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) variations
at different points within the room. This analysis helps in and optimizing the transmitter semi-angle for enhanced
understanding how the intensity of light impacts the performance.
effectiveness of VLC communication and the coverage area
within an indoor setting. Sheng-Hong Lin et al. [13] used a Lambertian emission
model along with On-Off Keying (OOK) modulation to study
 Manipulating Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR): input-dependent noise in VLC, proposing optimized receiver
SNR is a critical factor in communication systems, tilting angles that minimize BER, thereby improving system
affecting the quality and reliability of data transmission. This performance in noisy environments. JingyuanDuan et al.
research manipulates SNR by accounting for various noise [14]focused on simplifying VLC system design using off-the-
sources within the indoor environment and evaluating how shelf technologies, enhancing mobility with a non-imaging
different levels of noise influence the performance of the concentrator, which advances the commercialization of VLC
VLC system. by addressing design complexity and integration challenges.

 Demonstrating SNR Distribution for Diffuse and LOS DebanjanaGhosh et al.[15] developed a Li-Fi
Propagation: transceiver using Arduino for data transmission, highlighting
The study compares the SNR distribution in both diffuse the potential of Li-Fi as a superior alternative to Wi-Fi in
and LOS propagation scenarios. It specifically investigates wireless communication. Khalifeh et al.[16], through
how diffuse propagation, including the transmission of light simulations, emphasized the importance of strategic LED
through white concrete walls, contributes to illuminance, placement in VLC systems, showing that optimal positioning
received power, and SNR at the receiver. This analysis can enhance received power and minimize errors.
provides insights into how VLC systems can maintain high
performance even in complex indoor environments with In another study, Mohammed S.M. Gismalla et al. [17]
obstacles. conducted a multi-variable evaluation of optical attocell
models in VLC systems, analyzing different modulation
 Calculating Bit Error Rate: schemes and identifying binary phase-shift keying (BPSK) as
Finally, the research calculates the BER for different the most effective for optimal performance. TabishNiaz et al.
propagation scenarios to assess the reliability of data [18] compared square array and circular LED deployments

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3316

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
through simulations, proposing a circular LED deployment and reduce SNR fluctuations. However, these studies
that improves coverage and reduces energy consumption, primarily focus on specific aspects of VLC, such as noise
thereby enhancing system efficiency. management or LED configuration, without integrating these
factors into a broader system model that considers multiple
Mohammad F.L. Abdullah et al.[19] evaluated a VLC performance metrics simultaneously. Our research addresses
system with 13 optical attocells, optimizing for SNR and bit this gap by analyzing illuminance distribution, received
rate, and achieving significant communication quality power, and SNR within a unified model, allowing for a more
improvements. Nguyen et al. [20] utilized MATLAB and detailed examination of how these factors interact and
Simulink simulations to analyze transmitter positions and influence overall system performance. JingyuanDuan et al.
wall reflections in VLC environments, providing valuable [14] and Khalifeh et al. [16] have contributed to the field by
insights into illuminance and root mean square (RMS) delay simplifying VLC system design and emphasizing the
spread distributions that enhance the understanding of VLC importance of LED placement. While their work has made
system performance. strides toward practical VLC implementation, there is still a
need for a detailed analysis of how these design choices affect
Mahfouz etal.[21] compared a novel 16-LED array system performance under different propagation scenarios,
design with existing configurations, demonstrating that the including both line-of-sight (LOS) and diffuse propagation.
new design reduces power and SNR fluctuations, ensuring Our study fills this gap by specifically investigating the
uniform communication quality across the system. effects of diffuse transmission through walls and its impact
Manivannan et al. [22] combined practical measurements on BER, which is crucial for understanding VLC's viability
with a mathematical model to study LED behavior in VLC, in more complex indoor environments. Furthermore, while
contributing to a deeper understanding of power distribution research by Mohammed S.M. Gismalla et al. [17,19] and
and signal attenuation in these systems. TabishNiaz et al. [18] has highlighted the benefits of specific
modulation schemes and LED deployments, these studies
Sui-Il-Chol et al. [23] introduced a new LED lighting often do not explore the trade-offs between different
shape that optimizes both illuminance and data modulation techniques in a single, integrated model. Our
communication, even in the presence of obstacles, while research addresses this by comparing the BER of On-Off
Kominee et al. [24] conducted numerical simulations to Keying (OOK) and 16-bit Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
analyze the use of white LEDs for room illumination and (16-QAM) within the same system model, providing insights
optical wireless communication, highlighting their into how different modulation strategies can be optimized for
effectiveness in providing reliable communication and various indoor VLC scenarios. Studies like those by Sui-Il-
energy-efficient lighting. These contributions collectively Chol et al. [23] and Kominee et al.[24] have focused on
advance the field of VLC by addressing various challenges optimizing LED designs and exploring the use of white LEDs
and proposing innovative solutions to improve system for both illumination and communication. However, these
performance, efficiency, and reliability in indoor studies typically do not account for the complex interactions
environments. Table 1 represents the recent studies of VLC between lighting design and communication performance,
systems using LED. especially in environments with obstacles or varying
illumination requirements. Our research seeks to bridge this
 Research Gap gap by demonstrating how different propagation paths,
The existing body of research on visible light including diffuse reflections through materials like white
communication (VLC) has significantly advanced our concrete walls, contribute to overall system performance,
understanding of the technology's potential and limitations. thereby offering a more comprehensive understanding of
However, several research gaps remain, particularly VLC in practical indoor environments.
concerning the comprehensive modeling of indoor VLC
environments with a focus on practical implementation and  Our Contribution
performance optimization. Many studies, such as those by While existing research has significantly advanced the
Younus et al. [11]andVipul Dixit et al.[12], have concentrated field of visible light communication technology, there
on improving signal reliability and reducing bit error rates remains a pressing need for more integrated and
(BER) through advanced techniques like multi-beam comprehensive models that address multiple factors
transmitters (MBTs) and adaptive diversity techniques simultaneously within indoor environments. This study seeks
(ADT). While these studies have successfully demonstrated to fill this gap by developing a detailed model for indoor VLC
the benefits of these methods in minimizing signal fading and systems using LED technology. The research focuses on
SNR variations, they often rely on idealized conditions and analyzing fundamental characteristics such as illuminance
specific setups that may not fully capture the complexities of distribution, received power, and signal-to-noise ratio to
real-world indoor environments. Our study aims to bridge this better understand the impact of different propagation
gap by developing a more comprehensive model that scenarios, including both line-of-sight and diffuse
incorporates various transmitter configurations and receiver propagation. A particular emphasis is placed on exploring the
positions, providing a more holistic understanding of how effects of diffuse transmission through walls and its influence
VLC systems perform in practical indoor settings. Sheng- on the bit error rate in VLC systems. To achieve these
Hong Lin et al.[13]and Mahfouz et al.[21] have explored the objectives, the study is structured around several key tasks.
impact of noise and LED array designs on VLC system First, it involves developing an indoor VLC model that
performance, proposing methods to optimize receiver angles accurately represents the distribution of illuminance across

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3317

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
various transmitter configurations, such as single, four, and scenarios, specifically examining how diffuse propagation,
five transmitters, while also considering different receiver including light transmission through white concrete walls,
positions to evaluate how transmitter and receiver placement affects illuminance, received power, and SNR at the receiver.
affects system performance. Second, the research aims to Finally, the study calculates the BER for different
determine received power by establishing the relationship propagation scenarios, focusing on two modulation schemes:
between brightness and illuminance at various points within On-Off Keying and 16-bit Quadrature Amplitude
a room, providing insights into how light intensity impacts Modulation. By comparing these modulation techniques, the
the effectiveness of VLC communication. Third, the study research provides a comprehensive understanding of how
manipulates SNR by accounting for various noise sources in different strategies impact the performance and reliability of
the indoor environment, assessing how different noise levels VLC in indoor environments. Through this detailed analysis,
influence VLC performance to optimize communication the study aims to contribute valuable insights that will
quality. Additionally, the research demonstrates SNR enhance the optimization and broader adoption of VLC
distribution under both diffuse and LOS propagation technology in practical indoor communication systems.

Table 1 Recent Studies of VLC System Using LED

Paper Methodology Contribution Research Gap
Younus et al. Experimental setups and Demonstrates that MBTs Focuses on specific setups; lacks
[11] simulations to assess MBTs with enhance VLC by minimizing comprehensive analysis of
W-FOV and ADR in VLC signal fading, aiding in the multiple transmitter configurations
systems. design of reliable indoor systems. and diverse receiver placements.
Vipul Dixit et al. Simulation and analytical Shows that ADT improves BER Does not consider the impact of
[12] methods to evaluate ADT in by reducing SNR variations, diffuse propagation and wall
indoor VLC systems. optimizing transmitter semi- reflections on overall system
angle for better performance. performance.
Sheng-Hong Lin Lambertian emission model and Proposes optimized receiver Limited to specific noise
et al. OOK modulation to study input- tilting angles to minimize BER, management techniques; lacks
[13] dependent noise in VLC. enhancing system performance in integration with a broader system
noisy environments. model considering multiple
factors.
JingyuanDuan et Simplifies VLC system design Advances VLC Does not explore the effects of
al. using off-the-shelf technologies, commercialization by addressing multiple transmitter and receiver
[14] enhances mobility with a non- design complexity, mobility, and configurations on VLC
imaging concentrator. network integration challenges. performance in real-world
environments.
DebanjanaGhosh Li-Fi transceiver development Highlights Li-Fi's advantages Focuses on Li-Fi; does not address
et al. using Arduino for data over Wi-Fi, showing potential as the specific challenges of VLC in
[15] transmission. a superior wireless indoor environments, such as
communication alternative. propagation and SNR issues.
Khalifeh et al. Simulations to explore LED Emphasizes the critical role of Lacks consideration of how
[16] positioning effects on VLC strategic LED placement in diffuse reflections through walls
performance. optimizing received power and affect overall system performance
minimizing errors. and BER.
Mohammed Multi-variable evaluation of Introduces a novel attocell Does not compare multiple
S.M. Gismalla et optical attocell models in VLC model, identifying BPSK as the modulation schemes within the
al. systems, analyzing modulation most effective modulation same system model to evaluate
[17] schemes. scheme for optimal performance. performance across different
scenarios.
TabishNiaz et al. Simulations comparing square Proposes a circular LED Focuses on LED deployment
[18] array and circular LED deployment that improves shapes; lacks a detailed
deployments for VLC. coverage and reduces energy examination of SNR distribution
consumption, enhancing system and BER in various propagation
efficiency. scenarios.
Mohammad F.L. Evaluation of a VLC system with Achieves significant Does not address how different
Abdullah et al. 13 optical attocells optimized for communication quality propagation paths, such as diffuse
[19] SNR and bit rate. improvements, demonstrating the transmission through walls,
model's effectiveness in VLC impact system performance.
performance.
Nguyen et al. MATLAB and Simulink Provides insights into Limited focus on transmitter
[20] simulations to analyze transmitter illuminance and RMS delay positions and reflections; lacks
positions and wall reflections in spread distributions, enhancing integration of BER analysis across
VLC environments. different modulation schemes.

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3318

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
understanding of VLC system
performance.
Mahfouz et al. Comparison of a novel 16-LED Improves system performance by Focuses on LED array design;
[21] array design with existing reducing power and SNR does not explore the interplay
configurations in VLC systems. fluctuations, ensuring uniform between illuminance, SNR, and
communication quality. BER in different indoor setups.
Manivannan et Practical measurements and a Enhances understanding of LED Does not integrate findings into a
al. mathematical model to study performance in VLC systems, broader model that accounts for
[22] LED behavior in VLC. focusing on power distribution multiple factors affecting overall
and signal attenuation. system performance.
Sui-Il-Chol et al. Introduction of a new LED Demonstrates how the new LED Limited to a specific LED design;
[23] lighting shape for optimized design enhances both lacks broader analysis of system
illuminance and data illumination and data performance under varying
communication. transmission, even with propagation and receiver
obstacles. configurations.
Kominee et al. Numerical simulations to analyze Highlights the effectiveness of Does not address how white LEDs
[24] white LEDs for room white LEDs in providing reliable perform under different
illumination and optical wireless communication and energy- modulation schemes or the impact
communication in VLC. efficient lighting. of diffuse propagation on system
reliability.

III. METHODOLOGY including single, four, and five transmitters, to analyze their
impact on the system. In the third phase, key characteristics
This study aims to develop a comprehensive indoor such as illuminance distribution, received power, Signal-to-
VLC model using LED technology, focusing on analyzing Noise Ratio (SNR) under both Line-of-Sight (LOS) and Non-
illuminance distribution, received power, and SNR to Line-of-Sight (NLOS) conditions, and Bit Error Rate (BER)
understand the impact of different propagation scenarios, for On-Off Keying (OOK) and Quadrature Amplitude
including LOS and diffuse transmission through walls, on bit Modulation (QAM) will be evaluated. The fourth and final
error rate.The proposed study is structured into four distinct phase consists of a comparative analysis of the different
phases. The first phase involves the development of a Visible transmitter configurations based on the evaluated parameters.
Light Communication (VLC) system. The second phase The workflow diagram illustrating these phases is presented
focuses on exploring different transmitter configurations, in Figure 1.

Fig 1 Workflow diagram of proposed system

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3319

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
 Developing Indoor VLC System  Noise Power Spectral Density: This parameter represents
This study developed a Visible Light Communication the power distribution of noise across the bandwidth,
(VLC) system that involves the use of LED transmitters and affecting the system's signal-to-noise ratio.
photodetectors for wireless data transmission. Figure 2(a)  Bandwidth (10 GHz): The bandwidth determines the
presents the block diagram of the VLC communication range of frequencies over which the system can operate
process. The system begins with a modulated signal, which is effectively, directly influencing data transmission rates.
fed into the driver circuit of the LED transmitter. The LED  Room Area (25): This specifies the dimensions of the
converts the electrical signal into optical power, transmitting indoor environment where the VLC system is
it through the air to the receiver. The photodiode at the implemented.
receiver end converts the optical power back into an electrical  Reflectivity (0.78): Reflectivity measures how much of
signal. This signal then passes through an amplifier, filter, the incident light is reflected by the surfaces within the
and demodulator, ultimately reconstructing the original data room, impacting the diffuse propagation of light.
stream. This figure encapsulates the entire VLC  Half-Intensity Radiation Angle (2): This is the angle at
communication process, highlighting the roles of key which the intensity of light emitted by the LED is reduced
components such as the LED, photodiode, and signal to half of its maximum value, affecting the coverage area.
processing circuits. Figure 2(b) illustrates the spatial  Cut-Off Frequency (10 GHz): The cut-off frequency
arrangement of LED transmitters and user receivers within an defines the maximum frequency at which the system can
indoor environment. The LED transmitters are mounted on operate before the signal begins to attenuate.
the ceiling, providing coverage to the receiver plane where
 Field of View: This parameter indicates the angular range
multiple users (User 1, User 2, and User 3) are positioned. over which the receiver can effectively capture the
This configuration demonstrates the setup used to analyze the
incoming optical signal.
impact of different transmitter configurations and receiver
 Transmitted Optical Power (63 mW): This is the power
positions on the VLC system's performance. The proposed
level of the optical signal emitted by the LED transmitter.
VLC model is governed by several key parameters that
 Lambertian Constant (m = 1): The Lambertian constant
influence the system's performance:
characterizes the LED's radiation pattern, assuming a
uniform light distribution.
 Responsivity (0.289 A/W): This parameter indicates the
 Gain of Optical Filter (Ts(φ) = 1): The optical filter's gain
photodetector’s sensitivity, measuring the current
represents the proportion of the incoming light that passes
generated per unit of optical power received.
through the filter, affecting the overall signal strength.
 Path Loss (0.849): Path loss represents the reduction in
power density of the optical signal as it propagates  These parameters collectively define the operational
characteristics of the VLC system, influencing its
through the environment.
performance in terms of data transmission quality,
 Receiver Area (3): This refers to the effective area of the
coverage, and reliability.
photodetector that captures the incoming optical signal.

(a) Block diagram of the VLC communication process

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3320

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(b) Spatial arrangement of LED transmitters and user receivers within an indoor environment
Fig 2 Proposed VLC System [21]

Table 2 Parameters for VLC Model

Parameter Symbol Value
Responsivity  0.289 A/W
Path Loss  0.849
Receiver area AR 3 cm
2

Noise power spectral density No 10 15 A2 / Hz

Bandwidth B 10GHz
Room area ARoom 25 m
2

Reflectivity  0.78

2  max
Half intensity radiation angle 1200
Cut-off frequency f0 10GHz

Field of view  600

Transmitted optical power PT 63mW
Lambertian constant m 1
Gain of optical filter Ts(φ) 1

 Transmitter Configuration Figure 3(c) shows the configuration with five transmitters,
This study employed three different transmitter combining the central transmitter from the single setup with
configurations within the VLC system: single, four, and five the four transmitters from the second configuration. The
transmitters, as depicted in Figure 3. Figure 3(a) illustrates transmitters are positioned at coordinates (1.25, 1.25), (3.75,
the setup with a single transmitter positioned at the center of 1.25), (2.5, 2.5), (1.25, 3.75), and (3.75, 3.75). This
the area (coordinates 2.5, 2.5). This configuration represents configuration aims to enhance the uniformity and intensity of
the simplest form of deployment, focusing the light source the illumination across the area by integrating a central light
centrally. In Figure 3(b), four transmitters are arranged source with peripheral ones. These configurations are critical
symmetrically at the corners of the area, with coordinates in evaluating the impact of different transmitter placements
(1.25, 1.25), (3.75, 1.25), (1.25, 3.75), and (3.75, 3.75). This on the VLC system’s performance, particularly in terms of
arrangement is designed to provide more uniform coverage illuminance distribution, received power, and signal quality
across the entire area by spreading out the light sources. across the coverage area.

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3321

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

Fig 3 The Position of Leds When (A) Single Transmitter (B) Four Transmitter (C)Five Transmitter

 Evaluation of Different Characteristics Radiance intensity (I) is the radiant flux (Φ) divided by
This study evaluates various characteristics of the VLC the elementary solid angle (Ω):
system, including illuminance distribution, received power,
Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) under both Line-of-Sight (LOS) I = dΦ / dΩ (1)
and Non-Line-of-Sight (NLOS) conditions, and Bit Error
Rate (BER) for different modulation schemes—On-Off Irradiance (E) is the radiant flux incident on the
Keying (OOK) and Quadrature Amplitude Modulation elementary receiving area (A):
(QAM). These evaluations are conducted across different
transmitter configurations, specifically with single, four, and E = dΦ / dA (2)
five LED transmitters. This section provides a brief overview
of these characteristics and their significance in assessing the According to the relations above, the elementary radiant
performance and reliability of the proposed VLC system. flux is given by:

 Illuminance Distribution dΦ = I * dΩ (3)

This study calculated the illuminance pattern using
Lambert's law and the associated equations to model Therefore, the irradiance (E) can be expressed as:
irradiance formally.
E = I * dΩ / dA (4)
The following radiometric quantities are employed to
define the irradiance model: The solid angle (dΩ) is defined as:

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3322

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
dΩ = dA * cos(φ) / R² (5) m is the order of Lambertian emission, which characterizes
the LED beam spread.
SS
E = I * cos(φ) / R² (6) θ is the angle of emission from the LED.

Consider n LEDs placed at points (x₁, y₁), (x₂, y₂), ..., φ is the angle of incidence at the receiver.
(xn, yn), all on the same level z = 0. Each LED's intensity will
contribute to the total irradiance of the LED system at a point R is the distance between the LED and the receiver.
(x, y) on the receiving surface:
I_illum,total represents the total illuminance at the point (x,y)
E total = Σ(Iᵢ * cos(φᵢ) / Rᵢ²) (7) on the receiving surface, considering contributions from all n
LEDs.
To simplify the model, an intensity Lambert pattern will
be considered: Table 3 presents the parameters used for calculating the
illuminance pattern in the study. The table outlines the
Iᵢ = I₀ * cosᵐ(θᵢ) (8) configurations for different numbers of LEDs, their luminous
intensities, and the positions of the transmitters in the VLC
where I₀ is the maximum intensity, m is the Lambertian system.
order, and θᵢ is the angle between the normal to the surface
and the line-of-sight. The viewing angle φᵢ is related to the  One LED Configuration
line-of-sight: Luminous Intensity: The luminous intensity for this
single LED setup is 1200 candela (w/sr).
cos(φᵢ) = |z| / Rᵢ (9)
Transmitter Position: The LED is positioned centrally at
Given Rᵢ = √((x - xᵢ)² + (y - yᵢ)² + z²), and assuming z = coordinates [2.5, 2.5], which likely represents the center of
0 and cos(φᵢ) = z/Rᵢ, it results that cos(φᵢ) = z and: the room or area being analyzed.

cos(φᵢ) = z / Rᵢ (10)  Four LED Configuration

Luminous Intensity: In this configuration, the luminous
Combining equations (5), (6), and (8), we obtain the intensity of each LED is 300 candela (w/sr).
total irradiance as:
Transmitter Positions: The LEDs are placed
E_total = Σ(P_t,i * (m + 1) * cosᵐ(θᵢ) * cos(φᵢ) / (2π Rᵢ²)) symmetrically at four positions: [1.25, 3.75], [3.75, 3.75],
(11) [1.25, 1.25], and [3.75, 1.25]. These coordinates suggest that
the LEDs are positioned near the corners of the area, ensuring
This equation represents the irradiance model of the more uniform coverage across the entire space.
LED lighting system. Consider n LEDs placed at points (x₁,
y₁), (x₂, y₂), ..., (xn, yn), all on the same level z = 0. The total  Five LED Configuration
illuminance at a point (x, y) on the receiving surface is the Luminous Intensity: Each LED in this setup has a
sum of the contributions from each LED: luminous intensity of 240 candela (w/sr).

I_illum,total = Σ(P_t,i * (m + 1) * cosᵐ(θᵢ) * cos(φᵢ) / (2π Transmitter Positions: The LEDs are positioned at
Rᵢ²)) (12) [1.25, 3.75], [3.75, 3.75], [1.25, 1.25], [3.75, 1.25], and [2.5,
2.5]. This configuration combines the positions from the four
Here: LED setup with an additional central LED, which is located
at [2.5, 2.5]. This setup is likely designed to provide even
P_t is the transmitted optical power from the LED. better coverage by filling in any potential gaps in illuminance
that might occur with just four LEDs.

Table 3 Transmitter Value Forilluminance Pattern

Numbers of LED Luminous intensity w/sr Transmitter position
One 1200 [2.5,2.5]
Four 300 [1.25,3.75],[3.75,3.75],[1.25,1.25]&[3.75,1.25]
Five 240 [1.25,3.75],[3.75,3.75],[1.25,1.25],[3.75,1.25]&[2.5,2.5]

 Receive Power factors including the characteristics of the LED source, the
The received power at the photodetector in a Visible geometry of the system, and the properties of the
Light Communication (VLC) system, particularly in a direct photodetector and its associated components. Understanding
Line-of-Sight (LOS) scenario, is a critical factor in this equation is critical for designing and optimizing VLC
determining the efficiency and reliability of the systems, as it allows engineers to predict the performance of
communication link. This power is influenced by various the system under various conditions, such as changes in

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3323

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
distance, angle, or environmental factors. By carefully mentioned below to predict and optimize the system's
selecting components and configuring the system parameters, performance, ensuring reliable communication even in
the received power can be maximized, leading to more challenging noise environments.
reliable and efficient communication. The received power at
the photodetector from a single LED source in a direct Line- For simulation results it is easier to regard it as one
of-Sight (LOS) scenario is given by: source, Pchip and one virtual channel, |H|, which is sum of all
LOS gains.We define a reference signal-to-noise ratio as the
Prec = Pt . (((m + 1) * 〖cos〗^m (θ) * cos(φ)))/(2πR^2 )
total electrical signal power generated by the photodiode
rect(φ/φmax) * AR * Ts(φ) * g(φ) (13) (containing the dc component) over the AWGN power in
bandwidth (B=10 GHz)-
Where:

 Pt is the transmitted optical power from the LED. SNRo = 2 2 PR2 / ( N 0 B) = 2 2 Pchip
2
| H |2 / N0 B (15)
 m is the order of Lambertian emission, which
characterizes the LED beam spread. In a typical VLC environment, the dominant noise
 θ is the angle of emission from the LED. contribution is often due to shot noise, which arises from the
 φ is the angle of incidence at the receiver. ambient light, such as sunlight entering through windows.
 R is the distance between the LED and the receiver. Shot noise is a type of electronic noise that occurs due to the
 φmax is the receiver's field of view (FOV). random arrival of photons at the photodiode. Noise power
 AR is the effective receiver area. spectral density is, representing the power per unit bandwidth
 Ts(φ) is the gain of the optical filter (if present). (W/Hz)-
 g(φ) is the concentrator gain.
N0 = 2q  P ambient (16)
This relationship between received power and
illuminance is essential for designing efficient VLC systems.
By understanding and controlling each of the factors in the q is the elementary charge of an electron, approximately
equation, engineers can optimize the placement of LEDs and 1.602 x 10-19 coulombs.
photodetectors, select appropriate photodetector
characteristics, and manage the lighting environment to P ambient is the ambient optical power incident on the
ensure reliable communication. The received power refers to photodiode, primarily due to sunlight.
the amount of optical power detected by a photodetector after
For worst-case noise scenarios, we consider bright sky
light from an LED source has traveled through the
irradiance, which could be as high as 5.8 W/(nm·m²) across
environment and possibly undergone reflections, scattering,
and attenuation. The received power is typically measured in the visible spectrum. This ambient light contributes
watts (W). For example, in a scenario where path loss is significantly to the shot noise experienced by the photodiode
significant (e.g., due to a large distance or obstructed line-of-
sight), designers might choose a photodetector with higher  Signal to Noise Ratio determinationfor diffuse
responsivity or increase the LED's luminous output to propagation (NLOS)
maintain sufficient received power. Conversely, in well-lit We assume that all LEDs are driven by the same
environment with minimal path loss, a lower (electrical) signal. Then, in a flat channel, the received optical
responsivityphotodetector might suffice- signal power is the sum of powers coming from all light
emitting chips-
Received power can be related to illuminance by –
PR   |H i (0) | PT ,i  PChip | H | (17)
R p = 2* E 2
r * ( Ar ) 2
(14)
i

The illumination at any point of the receiving surface

Where, includes line of sight (LOS) from the LED chips as well as a
contribution of reflections off the walls or objects in the room.
[A/W] denotes the receiver responsivity To describe the illuminance at any point on a receiving
surface in a visible light communication (VLC) system, it is
 =Path Loss important to consider both the Line-of-Sight (LOS) and
reflective components of light, including those reflected by
walls. The channel response for directed (LOS) light can be
AR =Receiver Area modeled using Dirac pulses, while the diffuse portion can be
represented by an integrating-sphere model. The channel
 Signal to Noise Ratio determination for Direct LOS Link frequency response, in terms of optical power, can then be
The SNR in a VLC system is influenced by the received written as-
signal power, the photodiode's responsivity, and the noise
introduced by ambient light. By modeling the system as a
single source and virtual channel, we can use the equations

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3324

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
n remains in the system versus how much is lost after each
H ( f )   LOS ,i exp( j 2 f  LOS ,i )  reflection.
i 1

exp( j 2 f  DIFF )  Bit Error Rate in Optical On-Off Keying Modulation for
 DIFF (18) VLC Systems
1  j( f / f0 ) In Optical On-Off Keying modulation for Visible Light
Communication (VLC) systems, the Bit Error Rate (BER)
where  LOS and  DIFF represent the channel gain for can be expressed using the error function (erf), which
accounts for the noise and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in the
the LOS and diffuse signal; respectively-  LOS [s] and system. For OOK modulation, assuming additive white
Gaussian noise (AWGN), the BER is given by:
 DIFF [s] are the corresponding signal delays and f0 [Hz]
1 √𝑆𝑁𝑅
the cut-off (3-db) frequency of the purely diffuse channel.The BER = . erfc( )
2 √2
LOS gain from the ith LED chip is given by- (22)

LOS ,i  AR (m  1)cosm i cos i / 2 ri2 (19) or equivalently using the error function:

1 √𝑆𝑁𝑅
The Lambert index m depends on the radiation semi- BER = . (1 − erfc ( )) (23)
2 2
angle  as
Where:
m= -1/ log2 cos max (20)  erfc(x) = 1 - erf(x) is the complementary error function.
 SNR is the signal-to-noise ratio at the receiver.
2
Where, AR [ m ] is the effective receiver surface
In OOK, a higher SNR leads to a lower BER, improving
(together with filter and concentrator gain) and the other the communication reliability.This equation provides a direct
variables are introduced here relationship between the BER and the SNR for OOK
modulation in VLC systems under Gaussian noise conditions.
 r=distance between transmitter and receiver
  = angle of irradiance when light is emitted from  Bit Error Rate in Optical QAM Modulation for VLC
transmitter Systems
  = angle of incidence when light is incident to receiver The Bit Error Rate is a critical performance metric in
  =reflectivity of material=0.78(for white concrete) Visible Light Communication (VLC) systems, particularly
when using Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM)
 f =varying frequency schemes. In optical QAM, the BER is influenced by factors
f0 =3-db frequency such as signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), modulation order, and

the characteristics of the transmission medium. The BER for
a QAM system in VLC can be calculated using the following
 DIFF is related to optical path loss by  = -10log( equation:

 DIFF ). Path loss can be calculated using this relation. BER = 2 * (1 - 1/√M) * Q(√(3 * log2(M) * SNR / (M - 1)))
(24)
For diffuse link the law is-
 Comparative Analysis
This study conducts a comparative analysis of different
AR p
 DIFF = (21) transmitter configurations based on a comprehensive
ARooM 1  p evaluation of key parameters, including illuminance
distribution, received power, Signal-to-Noise Ratio, and Bit
Error Rate. The analysis focuses on three specific
In indoor VLC systems, light often undergoes multiple
configurations: a single transmitter, four transmitters, and
reflections off walls, ceilings, and other surfaces. The ratio
𝑝 five transmitters. Through this comparative analysis, the
can be relevant when considering the cumulative effect study examines how each configuration impacts the
1−𝑝
of these multiple reflections. For instance, when light is performance of the VLC system in terms of the evaluated
reflected multiple times within a room, the overall parameters.
contribution of reflected light to the received signal can be
estimated using this ratio. It helps in understanding how much
light remains available for communication after successive
reflections. It represents a situation where light is repeatedly
reflected, and the ratio gives insight into how much light

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3325

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION  Performance Evaluation of Different Characteristics of
VLC System
This section presents an evaluation and discussion of the This sub-section provides a performance evaluation of
results related to various key characteristics, including the various characteristics of the VLC system, including
illuminance distribution, received power, Signal-to-Noise illuminance distribution, received power, Signal-to-Noise
Ratio, and Bit Error Rate. The analysis is centered on three Ratio, and Bit Error Rate.
specific transmitter configurations: a single transmitter, four
transmitters, and five transmitters. Each configuration is  Illuminance Pattern
examined to understand its impact on the performance of the The Figure 4 and Figure 5 shows the 3D and 2D plot of
Visible Light Communication (VLC) system, providing illuminance distribution across the entire working plane in
insights into how different setups influence overall system relation to receiver positions. This visualization illustrates
efficiency and effectiveness. For the simulation of these how the illuminance varies across the surface of the receiver.
results, this study utilized MATLAB 2020 software, which The color gradient displayed in the sidebar reflects the range
was instrumental in modeling and analyzing the different of illuminance, from the minimum to the maximum value.
configurations and their respective performance metrics.

(a)

(b)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3326

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(c)
Fig 4 Illuminance pattern for (a) single (b) four (c) Five LED models (3D)

For 4(a) and 5(a) single LED model, the illuminance intensity of 240 W/sr, the illuminance ranges from 150 lux to
ranges from a minimum of 88.89 lux to a maximum of 450 lux. The increase in maximum illuminance beyond 450
approximately 1200 lux, attributable to the use of an LED lux is attributed to the additional central LED, which
lamp with a luminous intensity of 1200 W/sr. In a system with enhances the overall light distribution. As the distance from
four LEDs 4(b) and 5(b), where each LED has a luminous the transmitter increases, the brightness level diminishes,
intensity of 300 W/sr, the illuminance varies between 150 lux leading to a noticeable decrease in illuminance towards the
and 400 lux. The increase in maximum illuminance to edges of the receiver plane. The corners, in particular, exhibit
approximately 400 lux is due to the cumulative effect of light significantly lower illuminance levels compared to the areas
contributions from adjacent sources. In the case of a five- directly aligned with the line-of-sight (LOS) link from the
LED 4(c) and 5(c) system, with each LED having a luminous transmitter.

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3327

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(a)

(b)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3328

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(c)
Fig 5 Illuminance pattern for (a) single (b) four (c) Five LED models (2D)

 Received Power 7(a) model, the received power at the center point is above
When designing visible light communication (VLC) 2.5 mW, reaching its maximum value, while the minimum
systems, received power is a critical factor in determining the value is less than 0.5 mW. In contrast, the 6(b) and 7(b) model
system's overall performance, particularly in terms of signal shows that the received power reaches a maximum of 0.9 mW
strength and data transmission reliability. The distribution of at the line-of-sight (LOS) link of the four transmitters, but
received power can vary significantly depending on the decreases to below 0.1 mW at the center of the receiver
arrangement of LED transmitters and optocells within a given surface and the corner edges. This reduction is attributed to
environment. Different configurations, such as single, lower illuminance, resulting in a diminished amount of light
multiple, or arrayed LED setups, influence how light is received in these areas. For the 6(c) and 7(c) plot, the received
distributed and received across the communication area. power at the central position is approximately 1.1 mW, with
Figure 6 and Figure 7 illustrates the received power for the other transmitters showing received power ranging from
different LED configurations (3D and 2D). In the 6(a) and 1 mW to 0.9 mW.

(a)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3329

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(b)

(c)
Fig 6 Received Power pattern for (a) single (b) four (c) Five LED models (3D)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3330

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(a)

(b)

(c)
Fig 7 Received Power pattern for (a) single (b) four (c) Five LED models (2D)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3331

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
 Signal to Noise Ratio determination for Direct LOS Link LED system shown in Figure 8(b) and Figure 9(b), the SNR
In Line-of-Sight (LOS) links, the Signal-to-Noise Ratio ranges from -11.9584 dB to 29.2319 dB. In contrast, the five
(SNR) tends to be higher because the signal travels directly LED system in Figure 8(c) and Figure 9(c) display an SNR
from the transmitter (e.g., an LED) to the receiver (e.g., an that spans from -24.6396 dB to 39.6514 dB. While the five
optocell) without significant obstruction or reflection. This LED system achieves a higher maximum SNR, indicating the
direct path minimizes signal degradation, resulting in potential for better performance at the same brightness level,
stronger signal reception and, consequently, a higher SNR. it also exhibits a significantly lower minimum SNR compared
Figure 8 and Figure 9 illustrates the distribution of SNR in to the single and four LED systems. Conversely, the single
LOS for different LED configurations (3D and 2D). In the LED system maintains a higher minimum SNR than the other
single LED system depicted in Figure 8(a) and Figure 9(a), two systems, suggesting more consistent performance under
the SNR varies from 9.0510 dB to 31.6577 dB. For the four conditions where the SNR is lower.

(a)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3332

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(b)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3333

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(c)

(a)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3334

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(b)

(c)
 Signal to Noise Ratio determinationfor diffuse balance between signal coverage and SNR is critical to ensure
propagation (NLOS) effective communication in NLOS VLC systems.
In Visible Light Communication (VLC) systems, the
Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) in Non-Line-of-Sight (NLOS) Figure 10 and Figure 11 illustrates the SNR in NLOS
links with diffuse propagation is a critical factor in assessing conditions for different transmitter configurations (3D and
system performance, particularly when direct Line-of-Sight 2D). In these scenarios, the signal strength is typically highest
(LOS) paths are unavailable. Unlike LOS scenarios, where directly beneath the LED chip, where both LOS and diffuse
light travels directly from the transmitter to the receiver, components significantly contribute to the signal. As the
NLOS links rely on light that is reflected or scattered off distance from the LED increases, the SNR decreases,
surfaces such as walls, ceilings, and other obstacles before indicating that signal coverage weakens towards the edges
reaching the receiver. This scattering process can and corners of the room due to increased reliance on diffuse
significantly reduce signal strength, leading to a lower SNR propagation and a reduced LOS component. In Figure 10(a)
compared to LOS links. In NLOS environments with diffuse and Figure 11(a), the SNR reaches its peak value of
propagation, the signal is typically weakened due to multiple approximately 170 dB near the center of the room, where the
reflections, which not only reduce signal strength but also LOS component from the LED chip is strongest and most
introduce additional noise and interference. These factors directly contributes to signal strength. Figure 10(b) and
contribute to a further decline in SNR, making it challenging Figure 11(b) shows an SNR range from approximately 150 to
to maintain strong and reliable communication.To achieve 170 dB, with the highest values centered around 165 dB. The
adequate SNR in these scenarios, it is essential to optimize regions of peak SNR correspond to areas where LOS
the reflective properties of the environment, strategically components from multiple LEDs constructively interfere,
place transmitters and receivers, and apply techniques that resulting in stronger signals. Conversely, the SNR decreases
boost signal strength while minimizing noise. A careful in areas dominated by diffuse propagation or where
destructive interference between signals from different LEDs

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3335

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
occurs. In Figure 10(c) and Figure 11(c), the use of five LED multiple regions, thereby enhancing overall coverage
chips creates multiple regions of strong signal coverage, compared to the scenario with a single LED. This
leading to a more evenly distributed SNR profile across the configuration effectively spreads signal strength throughout
space. The presence of several peaks in SNR values indicates the room, improving communication reliability in NLOS
that the LEDs are contributing to robust signal strength in settings.

(a)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3336

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(b)

(c)
Fig 10 SNR pattern for (a) single (b) four (c) Five LED models in NLOS propagation (3D)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3337

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

(a)

(b)

(c)
Fig 11 SNR pattern for (a) single (b) four (c) Five LED models in NLOS propagation (2D)

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3338

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
 Bit Error Rate in Optical On-Off Keying Modulation for leads to a higher SNR, resulting in fewer bit errors. Moreover,
VLC Systems spatial multiplexing, which allows different parts of the data
Figure 12 presents the BER versus SNR curve for OOK to be transmitted simultaneously via multiple LEDs, further
(On-Off Keying) modulation, comparing the performance of increases the data rate and improves overall performance. In
a system using multiple LEDs with that of a single LED. The contrast, the single-LED system lacks these capabilities,
results demonstrate that the system with multiple LEDs which leads to inferior BER performance. As the SNR
outperforms the single-LED setup in terms of BER at any reaches 0 dB, the BER reduces to 0.1 for all configurations.
given SNR. This is attributed to several factors, including At higher SNR values, such as 10 dB and 20 dB, the BER
diversity benefits, stronger signal strength, and the potential continues to decrease. Interestingly, at these elevated SNR
use of spatial multiplexing in multi-LED systems. Multiple levels, the single-LED setup achieves the lowest error rates,
LEDs provide a more robust and consistent signal at the while the four- and five-LED configurations exhibit slightly
receiver, enhancing system performance. A stronger signal higher BERs.

Fig 12 BER versus SNR Curve for OOK

 Bit Error Rate in Optical QAM Modulation for VLC system. As the SNR increases to medium and high levels
Systems (greater than 10 dB), the performance gap between the
Figure 13 illustrates the BER versus SNR performance configurations narrows significantly. All three setups achieve
for 16-bit QAM (Quadrature Amplitude Modulation), similarly low BERs at higher SNRs, with the five-LED
comparing single-LED and multi-LED (four and five LEDs) configuration eventually converging to the performance of
configurations. The graph reveals distinct trends at different the single-LED setup around 20 dB.Despite the single-LED
SNR levels. At low SNR values (below 10 dB), the single- setup demonstrating better performance at lower SNRs, the
LED configuration outperforms the multi-LED setups by multi-LED configurations (four and five LEDs) offer
achieving a lower BER. This suggests that the four- and five- enhanced system robustness and coverage overall. However,
LED systems are more susceptible to noise at lower SNR this increased robustness comes at the cost of requiring higher
levels, resulting in higher BERs compared to the single-LED SNR to achieve comparable BER performance.

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3339

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729

Fig 13 BER versus SNR performance for 16-bit QAM

 Comparative Analysis demonstrates the highest maximum SNR, indicating stronger

Table 4 provides a comparative analysis of key performance under favorable conditions.
performance characteristics across different LED
configurations, including single, four, and five LEDs. The  SNR (NLOS):
table evaluates factors such as illuminance patterns, received In Non-Line of Sight (NLOS) conditions, the SNR for
power, and SNR for both Line of Sight (LOS) and Non-Line the single LED ranges from 135.9570 dB to 165.8352 dB.
of Sight (NLOS) conditions. The multi-LED setups, however, provide higher SNR values,
with the four-LED configuration achieving an SNR range of
 Illuminance Pattern: 154.1244 dB to 167.6480 dB, and the five-LED setup
The single LED configuration demonstrates a wider reaching 154.3274 dB to 170.8975 dB. These results indicate
range of illuminance, with values ranging from 88.89 lux to that multi-LED configurations offer significantly improved
1200 lux. In contrast, the multi-LED setups (four and five SNR in NLOS scenarios, particularly at higher values.
LEDs) exhibit more focused illuminance patterns, with
minimum values of less than 150 lux and maximum values  BER (OOK):
exceeding 400 lux and 450 lux, respectively. This suggests Multi-LED systems outperform single-LED setups in
that multi-LED systems provide more concentrated lighting terms of BER due to diversity benefits, stronger signal
with slightly narrower illuminance coverage. strength, and spatial multiplexing. Multi-LED configurations
provide a more robust and consistent signal, enhancing
 Received Power: overall performance. However, at higher SNR levels, the
For the single LED configuration, received power varies single-LED setup achieves the lowest error rates, while the
between 0.5 mW and 2.5 mW. In comparison, the multi-LED multi-LED systems exhibit slightly higher BERs. Despite
setups show less variation, with the four-LED configuration this, multi-LED setups offer better system robustness and
ranging from 0.9 mW to 1 mW and the five-LED higher data rates.
configuration ranging from 0.9 mW to 1.1 mW. These results
indicate that multi-LED systems provide more consistent  BER (QAM):
power delivery, though with a narrower range than the single- At low SNR values (below 10 dB), the single-LED
LED setup. configuration outperforms the four- and five-LED setups by
achieving a lower BER, as the multi-LED systems are more
 SNR (LOS): susceptible to noise. As the SNR increases above 10 dB, the
In Line of Sight (LOS) conditions, the single LED setup performance gap narrows, and all configurations achieve
exhibits an SNR range of 9.0510 to 31.6577. The four-LED similarly low BERs, with the five-LED system converging to
setup shows an SNR range from -11.9584 to 29.2319, while the performance of the single-LED setup around 20 dB.
the five-LED configuration ranges from -24.6396 to 39.1574. While the single-LED performs better at lower SNRs, the
Notably, while the single LED setup generally performs four- and five-LED setups offer greater system robustness
better at lower SNR levels, the five-LED system and coverage, though they require higher SNR to match the
single-LED's BER performance.

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3340

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
Table 4 Comparative analysis of illuminance patterns, received power, and SNR for single-LED and multi-LED (four and
five LEDs) configurations under Line of Sight (LOS) and Non-Line of Sight (NLOS) conditions
Characteristics No. of LED Minimum value Maximum value
Illuminance pattern Single LED 88.89 lux 1200 lux
Four LED <150 lux >400 lux
Five LED <150 lux >450 lux
Received Power Single LED 0.5 mW 2.5 mW
Four LED 0.9 mW 1 mW
Five LED 0.9 mW 1.1 mW
SNR (LOS) Single LED 9.0510 31.6577
Four LED -11.9584 29.2319
Five LED -24.6396 39.1574
SNR (NLOS) Single LED 135.9570db 165.8352 db
Four LED 154.1244 db 167.6480db
Five LED 154.3274db 170.8975db

Each LED configuration presents unique advantages While the single LED performs well for general
based on the specific performance metric: coverage and power, particularly at low SNR levels, the five-
LED configuration offers the most robust and reliable
 Single LED: performance, especially in challenging environments with
The single LED setup excels in providing a broader NLOS conditions and higher SNR requirements. Therefore,
illuminance pattern and higher received power. It also shows the five-LED setup is the best option for applications
strong SNR performance in Line of Sight (LOS) conditions, prioritizing strong signal quality and consistency over a wide
especially at lower SNR levels, making it suitable for range of conditions.
applications where wider coverage and higher signal strength
are required in direct transmission scenarios. In terms of BER  Discussion
performance, for both OOK and QAM modulations, the The results of this study provide valuable insights into
single-LED setup performs better at lower SNR levels (below the performance of different LED configurations in Visible
10 dB), achieving a lower BER compared to the four- and Light Communication systems. The use of multiple LEDs,
five-LED systems. particularly in the four- and five-LED configurations, proved
to be effective in achieving a more uniform illuminance
 Four LEDs: distribution across the receiver plane. This is particularly
The four-LED configuration offers more concentrated useful in environments where consistent lighting is critical for
illuminance and consistent received power, though it communication reliability, such as large indoor spaces with
performs slightly worse in LOS SNR compared to the single multiple users or devices. The spread of light in multi-LED
LED. However, it improves significantly in Non-Line of setups ensures that even in non-line-of-sight conditions,
Sight (NLOS) conditions, making it a better choice in sufficient light reaches the receiver, maintaining strong signal
environments with potential signal obstructions or where integrity. However, the increased illuminance in multi-LED
indirect transmission paths are more common. For BER setups comes at the cost of complexity, particularly in
(OOK), the four-LED setup shows a higher BER at low SNR, managing the Signal-to-Noise Ratio and Bit Error Rate. The
but its performance converges closer to the single-LED results show that multi-LED configurations, while enhancing
system as SNR increases. In QAM modulation, the four-LED signal strength and reliability, are more susceptible to
setup follows a similar trend, with higher BER at low SNR interference and noise, especially in lower SNR
but narrowing the gap at medium and high SNR levels. environments. This is evident in the BER performance, where
single-LED configurations outperform multi-LED setups at
 Five LEDs: higher SNR levels. In these scenarios, the single-LED system
The five-LED configuration demonstrates the best demonstrates a more consistent BER, suggesting that in
overall performance in terms of maximum SNR in both LOS simpler indoor environments with minimal interference,
and NLOS conditions, particularly at higher SNR levels. single-LED systems may be the optimal choice. When
Although it lags behind the single LED at lower SNR levels, comparing modulation techniques, On-Off Keying shows
it outperforms both the single and four-LED setups in NLOS clear advantages in terms of BER performance, particularly
scenarios, making it ideal for environments that require high in single-LED setups. Its simplicity makes it more robust
robustness and signal reliability. For BER (OOK), the five- against noise, especially in high-SNR conditions. Quadrature
LED system initially shows higher BER at low SNR values Amplitude Modulation, while offering higher data rates,
but outperforms the single LED as SNR rises. In QAM suffers from higher BER at lower SNR levels, particularly in
modulation, the five-LED system converges to the single- diffuse propagation scenarios. This indicates that while QAM
LED performance at around 20 dB SNR, offering better can be beneficial in systems where higher data throughput is
robustness at high SNR levels. required, it may not be suitable for environments with
significant noise or where minimizing errors is critical. The
comparison between line-of-sight (LOS) and non-line-of-
sight (NLOS) conditions further highlights the strengths and

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3341

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
weaknesses of each configuration. In LOS conditions, the multi-LED setups. This indicates that while QAM can
direct transmission path allows for higher SNR values and provide increased data throughput, it is better suited for
lower BER, particularly in single-LED setups. However, in environments where higher SNR can be consistently
NLOS conditions, multi-LED configurations demonstrate maintained. Overall, the findings of this study highlight the
their superiority by maintaining a higher SNR, even when need for a balanced approach when designing VLC systems.
signals are reflected or scattered. This makes multi-LED While multi-LED setups provide enhanced coverage and
setups particularly useful in environments where direct light reliability, particularly in complex indoor environments, they
paths are frequently obstructed, such as in rooms with also introduce challenges related to managing noise and
partitions or furniture. maintaining low BER. Single-LED configurations, despite
their limitations in coverage, offer a more stable performance
This study illustrates that VLC performance is highly in terms of BER, especially at higher SNR levels. These
dependent on the specific indoor environment and insights are critical for optimizing VLC systems based on the
communication requirements. Multi-LED setups offer the specific needs of the environment and application.
advantage of broader coverage and higher reliability in
complex environments, but they require careful management Future VLC systems will benefit from these findings by
of noise and interference. Single-LED configurations, on the adopting hybrid approaches that combine the strengths of
other hand, are more suited for environments where different configurations and modulation techniques. For
maintaining low BER is more critical than coverage. These instance, a system could use multi-LED setups in areas where
findings will be instrumental in guiding the design and broader coverage is needed and switch to single-LED
optimization of future VLC systems, allowing them to be configurations in environments where data integrity and low
tailored to different use cases, from secure indoor error rates are paramount. Additionally, improvements in
communication networks to energy-efficient smart lighting modulation techniques and noise management strategies will
systems. further enhance VLC’s potential as a viable alternative to
V. CONCLUSION traditional RF systems, especially in environments where
security, energy efficiency, and minimal interference are
This study explored the performance of Visible Light prioritized. This study contributes to the growing body of
Communication (VLC) systems with different transmitter research on VLC technology, offering a comprehensive
configurations and modulation techniques, focusing on key evaluation of the trade-offs between different transmitter
performance metrics such as illuminance distribution, configurations and modulation schemes. The findings
received power, Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR), and Bit Error provide valuable guidance for optimizing VLC systems for
Rate (BER). The results demonstrate that multi-LED specific use cases, whether for smart lighting systems, secure
configurations, particularly those using four or five LEDs, indoor communication networks, or high-speed data
offer significant advantages in terms of achieving uniform transmission in complex environments. By addressing the
illuminance and higher SNR, making them ideal for challenges related to BER and SNR, this research paves the
environments where broader coverage and stronger signal way for the broader adoption of VLC technology in real-
reliability are essential. These setups excel in non-line-of- world applications.
sight (NLOS) conditions where signals are likely to scatter
due to reflections from surfaces like walls or furniture.  Statements and Declarations
However, the study also reveals that these benefits come with
trade-offs, particularly in terms of BER. While multi-LED  Funding
setups improve coverage and reliability, they are more prone The authors declare that no financial support, grants, or
to errors, especially at lower SNR levels. The single-LED other forms of assistance were received during the
configuration, though more limited in terms of coverage, preparation of this manuscript.
consistently achieves lower BER at higher SNR levels,
making it more suitable for simpler indoor environments  Conflict Interests
where direct communication paths are prevalent, such as in The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.
line-of-sight (LOS) conditions. This suggests that for
applications requiring low error rates and reliable data  Ethics Approval
transmission, the single-LED system is still a strong This article does not involve any studies conducted with
contender, especially in controlled environments with human participants or animals by the authors.
minimal interference.
 Data Availability
The comparison of modulation techniques further The datasets generated during this study are available
emphasizes the importance of selecting the right from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
configuration for the specific application. On-Off Keying
(OOK), due to its simplicity, is more resilient to noise and
performs better in environments where minimizing errors is
critical. On the other hand, Quadrature Amplitude
Modulation (QAM), while offering higher data rates, is more
sensitive to noise and requires higher SNR to achieve
comparable performance, particularly in more complex

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3342

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
REFERENCES communication system with angle diversity
transmitter. In 2020 IEEE 4th Conference on
[1]. Dahri, F.A., Umrani, F.A., Baqai, A. and Mangrio, Information & Communication Technology
H.B., 2020. Design and implementation of LED–LED (CICT) (pp. 1-5). IEEE.
indoor visible light communication system. Physical [13]. Lin, S.H., Liu, C., Bao, X. and Wang, J.Y., 2018.
communication, 38, p.100981. Indoor visible light communications: performance
[2]. Zeng, L., O'Brien, D., Le-Minh, H., Lee, K., Jung, D. evaluation and optimization. EURASIP Journal on
and Oh, Y., 2008, May. Improvement of date rate by Wireless Communications and Networking, 2018,
using equalization in an indoor visible light pp.1-12.
communication system. In 2008 4th IEEE [14]. Duan, J., Shi, A. and Liu, Y., 2014, July. A practical
international Conference on Circuits and Systems for indoor visible light communication system. In 2014
Communications (pp. 678-682). IEEE. 9th International Symposium on Communication
[3]. O'Brien, D., Le Minh, H., Zeng, L., Faulkner, G., Lee, Systems, Networks & Digital Sign (CSNDSP) (pp.
K., Jung, D., Oh, Y. and Won, E.T., 2008. Indoor 1170-1175). IEEE.
visible light communications: challenges and [15]. Ghosh, D., Chatterjee, S., Kothari, V., Kumar, A.,
prospects. Free-Space Laser Communications Nair, M. and Lokesh, E., 2019, March. An application
VIII, 7091, pp.60-68. of Li-Fi based wireless communication system using
[4]. Schmid, S., Richner, T., Mangold, S. and Gross, T.R., visible light communication. In 2019 International
2016, June. EnLighting: An indoor visible light Conference on Opto-Electronics and Applied Optics
communication system based on networked light (Optronix) (pp. 1-3). IEEE.
bulbs. In 2016 13th Annual IEEE International [16]. Ala’F, K., AlFasfous, N., Theodory, R., Giha, S. and
Conference on Sensing, Communication, and Darabkh, K.A., 2019, January. On the effect of light
Networking (SECON) (pp. 1-9). IEEE. emitting diodes positions on the performance of an
[5]. Duan, J., Shi, A. and Liu, Y., 2014, July. A practical indoor visible light communication system. In 2019
indoor visible light communication system. In 2014 IEEE Conference of Russian Young Researchers in
9th International Symposium on Communication Electrical and Electronic Engineering
Systems, Networks & Digital Sign (CSNDSP) (pp. (EIConRus) (pp. 10-14). IEEE.
1170-1175). IEEE. [17]. Gismalla, M.S., Abdullah, M.F.L., Ahmed, M.S.,
[6]. Hussein, A.T. and Elmirghani, J.M., 2015, June. Mabrouk, W.A., Najib, A.F., Saeid, E., Supa'at,
Performance evaluation of multi-gigabit indoor A.S.M. and Das, B., 2021. Design and analysis of
visible light communication system. In 2015 20th different optical attocells deployment models for
European Conference on Networks and Optical indoor visible light communication
Communications-(NOC) (pp. 1-6). IEEE. system. International Journal of Integrated
[7]. Liang, Q., Wang, L., Li, Y. and Liu, M., 2018, Engineering, 13(6), pp.253-264.
October. Plugo: A scalable visible light [18]. Niaz, M.T., Imdad, F., Kim, S. and Kim, H.S., 2016.
communication system towards low-cost indoor Deployment methods of visible light communication
localization. In 2018 IEEE/RSJ International lights for energy efficient buildings. Optical
Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems Engineering, 55(10), pp.106113-106113.
(IROS) (pp. 3709-3714). IEEE. [19]. Gismalla, M.S., Abdullah, M.F., Niass, M.I., Das, B.
[8]. Juneja, S. and Vashisth, S., 2017, October. Indoor and Mabrouk, W.A., 2020. Improve uniformity for an
positioning system using visible light communication. indoor visible light communication
In 2017 International Conference on Computing and system. International Journal of Communication
Communication Technologies for Smart Nation Systems, 33(8), p.e4349.
(IC3TSN) (pp. 79-83). IEEE. [20]. Nguyen, H.Q., Choi, J.H., Kang, M., Ghassemlooy,
[9]. Makvandi, A., Kavian, Y.S. and Namjoo, E., 2021. Z., Kim, D.H., Lim, S.K., Kang, T.G. and Lee, C.G.,
VLCIoT: design and implementation of a visible light 2010, July. A MATLAB-based simulation program
communication system for indoor Internet of Things for indoor visible light communication system.
applications. Applied Optics, 60(36), pp.11094- In 2010 7th International Symposium on
11103. Communication Systems, Networks & Digital Signal
[10]. Liu, X., Guo, L. and Wei, X., 2021. Indoor visible Processing (CSNDSP 2010) (pp. 537-541). IEEE.
light applications for communication, positioning, and [21]. Mahfouz, N.E., Fayed, H.A., Abd El Aziz, A. and Aly,
security. Wireless Communications and Mobile M.H., 2018. Improved light uniformity and SNR
Computing, 2021(1), p.1730655. employing new LED distribution pattern for indoor
[11]. Younus, S.H., Al-Hameed, A.A., Hussein, A.T., applications in VLC system. Optical and Quantum
Alresheedi, M.T. and Elmirghani, J.M., 2020, July. Electronics, 50, pp.1-18.
Multi-branch transmitter for indoor visible light [22]. Manivannan, K., Raja, A.S. and Selvendran, S., 2016.
communication systems. In 2020 22nd International Performance Investigation of Visible Light
Conference on Transparent Optical Networks Communication System Using Optisystem Simulation
(ICTON) (pp. 1-6). IEEE. Tool. International Journal of Microwave & Optical
[12]. Dixit, V. and Kumar, A., 2020, December. Technology, 11(5).
Performance analysis of indoor visible light

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3343

Volume 10, Issue 4, April – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr1729
[23]. Choi, S.I., 2012, July. Analysis of VLC channel based
on the shapes of white-light LED lighting. In 2012
Fourth International Conference on Ubiquitous and
Future Networks (ICUFN) (pp. 1-5). IEEE.
[24]. Komine, T. and Nakagawa, M., 2004. Fundamental
analysis for visible-light communication system using
LED lights. IEEE transactions on Consumer
Electronics, 50(1), pp.100-107.
[25]. Grubor, J., Randel, S., Langer, K.D. and Walewski,
J.W., 2008. Broadband information broadcasting
using LED-based interior lighting. Journal of
Lightwave technology, 26(24), pp.3883-3892.

IJISRT25APR1729 www.ijisrt.com 3344