[HN Gopher] A New Wave of Underwater Comms Is Coming
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A New Wave of Underwater Comms Is Coming
        
       Author : Brajeshwar
       Score  : 33 points
       Date   : 2024-08-27 15:31 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (spectrum.ieee.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (spectrum.ieee.org)
        
       | nradov wrote:
       | Garmin scuba diving products now have underwater communication
       | features built in. Unfortunately they're locked down so you can't
       | use them for any other purposes.
       | 
       | https://www.garmin.com/en-US/garmin-technology/dive-science/...
        
         | slau wrote:
         | For those who aren't scuba divers, 10m range is very
         | impressive. Most radiowave-based systems have a range of 1-2m,
         | with many being plagued with connectivity issues.
         | 
         | One of the main use-cases is air integration, which allows you
         | to have a transmitter connected to your cylinder which monitors
         | gas pressure and relays it to the dive computer on your wrist.
         | 
         | This is an alternative (or, depending on the school of thought,
         | in addition) to having an SPG (submersible pressure gauge)
         | which is hopefully attached to your left d-ring, but for many
         | recreational divers stuffed in a pocket somewhere or scraping
         | on the bottom.
         | 
         | Air Integration is quite an investment (3-500EUR per
         | transmitter) and there is basically no interoperability between
         | brands.
         | 
         | When Garmin came out with this, it made quite a splash, as all
         | of a sudden instructors could keep an eye on the cylinder
         | pressure of their students. This is a very minor use-case
         | though, and I don't believe it's used a lot.
         | 
         | As for underwater communication, a good chunk of the scuba
         | community is quite opposed to relying on electronics for
         | communication. Hand-based signals are quite good, underwater
         | paper does exist, and if you're so far from your buddy that you
         | need to wirelessly communicate you're in a lot of trouble.
         | 
         | This all being said, as a boat captain responsible for the
         | people underwater, I would love a local area network that
         | allows me to pull the plug on a dive, or get some emergency
         | notification. For example "weather is turning, please call the
         | dive" or "I was blown off the wreck, please pick me up".
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | Garmin occasionally sends me customer surveys, and the
           | questions on a recent survey implied that they were looking
           | into boat to diver communications as a use case. I don't know
           | whether they're actively working on this, but it seems like
           | it could possible to add to future versions of their boat
           | sonar products.
        
           | jeewes wrote:
           | > This all being said, as a boat captain responsible for the
           | people underwater, I would love a local area network that
           | allows me to pull the plug on a dive, or get some emergency
           | notification. For example "weather is turning, please call
           | the dive" or "I was blown off the wreck, please pick me up".
           | 
           | In case you are interested, there is a Finnish company called
           | UWIS (short for underwater information systems), that does
           | exactly this [1]. Their system has buoyes that can track the
           | diver units and provide communication channel between on the
           | surface pc and the divers via wifi and sonar network. The
           | system allows two way communication. Tight bandwidth of
           | course as a limiting factor.
           | 
           | [1] https://uwis.fi/en/
        
           | itishappy wrote:
           | For underwater communication, nothing beats the ol' hit-tank-
           | with-knife (or the slightly more sophisticated tank banger).
           | 
           | https://www.amazon.com/s?k=tank+banger
        
       | yesfitz wrote:
       | I didn't find anything about the potential effects on marine
       | life. I'm not in the market for this, so maybe it's obvious to
       | those who are, but it would be nice to address it somewhere for
       | the uninitiated.
       | 
       | But their modem[1] uses NATO's JANUS standard[2], which
       | communicates at 11.5 kHz, which is just audible to humans, but
       | well within range of marine mammals[3].
       | 
       | 1: https://www.subseapulse.com/products/ 2:
       | https://spectrum.ieee.org/nato-develops-first-standardized-a...
       | 3:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearing_range#/media/File:Anim...
        
         | alas44 wrote:
         | I completely agree, filling oceans/seas with noise seems like a
         | good recipe to further stress marine ecosystems
        
         | puzzydunlop wrote:
         | For underwater acoustic systems there is a well understood and
         | effective marine mammal mitigation process that's followed.
         | Basically, slowly stepping up in power. Not sure if they're
         | employing that here but if it involves NATO, I would expect
         | that's being employed
        
       | kayodelycaon wrote:
       | This sounds like another startup that is ignoring all of the edge
       | cases, testing, calibration, and certification that make this
       | kind of product expensive.
       | 
       | In this case it's a good idea. And they know exactly where their
       | market is. I hope it takes off. :)
       | 
       | There are plenty of applications where the reliability
       | requirements are it works most of the time.
        
       | moffkalast wrote:
       | > Their transducer will convert energy into acoustic signals (and
       | vice versa) using a modified device that's typically used to
       | listen to marine mammals and costs about $400.
       | 
       | That does beat the next cheapest option, the Waterlinked M16
       | that's $2.4k for 1km range and 10 bits/s. They don't list any
       | specifics about capabilities though.
        
       | mikewarot wrote:
       | It seems to me that if you need to generate large acoustic
       | signals underwater, HASEL actuators might be the way to go.[1]
       | Since they're effectively just bags full of incompressible fluid,
       | they could work at any depth.
       | 
       | Sensing sound.... that might be harder. Perhaps you could close-
       | loop control the capacitance of the above, and "listen" to the
       | error signal?
       | 
       | [1] https://www.artimusrobotics.com/
        
       | anfractuosity wrote:
       | "The team is also working on a cheaper version of traditional
       | transducers, which can cost more than $2,000 a piece" - Do these
       | transducers require very high input power out of interest?
       | 
       | Also what frequency does an acoustic modem typically use?
       | 
       | And finally are they expensive because they're somewhat niche, or
       | difficult to manufacture, both, or other reasons?
       | 
       | Edit: looks like the datasheet for 'Waterlinked M16', mentioned
       | in another comment answers the first couple of questions. Seems a
       | lot lower in power than I'd have thought.
        
       | mncharity wrote:
       | Years ago an oceanography-oriented founder told of attempting to
       | patent their nice transducer. The response was unexpected: the
       | prior art is classified, so no patent, and stop all use.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-27 23:00 UTC)