Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS 2020)
IEEE Xplore Part Number:CFP20K74-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-4876-2
Robot Operating System based Charging Pad
Detection for Multirotors
Abhijith .V.S
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Defence Institute of Advanced Technology
Pune, India
mr.abhijithvs@gmail.co m
Abstract—The objective of this paper is to develop a wireless
charging pad detection mechanism for autonomous quadrotors
using AprilTag, and analyze its performance. It uses a Raspberry
pi 3B+ single board for data processing and Microsoft webcam
for image acquisition and Robot Operating S ystem (ROS )
framework and PIXHAWK series flight controller. The charging
pad has an AprilTag marker on its top, the camera captures the
image and gives it to the ROS node to get the relative position
between the camera and charging pad. The system can detect the
charging pad at moderate altitudes with a limited number of false
detections and give the relative coordinates. An increase in tag
size causes an increase in the detection range. The system is
compatible with any S ingle Board Computers (S BC) and
cameras. This method is mainly for detecting wireless charging
pad to charge quadrotor without human involvement.
Keywords— Quadrotor; ROS ; AprilTag; Wireless Charging;
Raspberry Pi
I. INT RODUCT ION
Nowadays, quadrotors and other multirotor are becoming
more and more popular. They are widely used in military
surveillance, delivery services, warehouse automation,
photography, etc. [1]. The major problem faced by these
multirotor is limited fly time. The leading causes are the
motors, and other electronics components consume more
power (more compared to ground robots since more energy
required to overcome the gravity) and the usage of bulky
batteries. Bulky batteries increase the capacity of the battery
and which intern increases the flight time. But as the capacity
of the battery increases, the weight of the multirotor also
increases. There are are many solutions to tackle this problem;
one of the leading s olutions we got was using a wireless
charging pad. Whenever the battery of the multirotor is low, it
can come to the charging pad and charge itself and continue its
work. Here, we propose a method to implement the detection
of the charging pad for quadrotors during its flight. This system
is performed entirely on ROS. ROS is a meta-operating system
that works along with the primary operating system (OS)
(Linux or Windows) in which it is installed. ROS acts as an
intermediate between the main OS and hardware. In ROS, each
node represents a program that has a specific function (for
example, fetching a sensor data or sending a command to rotate
motor). ROS has an inter-process communication facility. The
topic is a link through which two nodes communicate, and the
978-1-7281-4876-2/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Gothenburg. Downloaded on July 26,2020 at 16:26:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
A.A. Bazil Raj
Department of Electronics Engineering
Defence Institute of Advanced Technology
Pune, India
brazilraj.a@diat.ac.in
information passed through nodes are called messages. The
data type of the message is the data type of the information
contained in the message file. Messages can be of complex
data types. That is, it can include different kinds of data types
[2].
AprilTag is a marker widely used in robotic applications. It
uses a barcode-like a tag system to obtain 6 DOF localization
features from a single image. It is immune to occlusion, lens
distortion, and wrapping. AprilTag system consists of different
tag families [3]. The AprilTag 2 system uses a new algorithm
that reduces false detection, increases detection rates, and
reduces computation time [4]. Dynamic markers use an LCD
screen to display the AprilTag. The size of the marker reduces
as the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) approaches the
marker. This method is useful for UAVs flying at high altitudes
[5]. For indoor autonomous multirotor, Motion Capture system
(MoCap), together with AprilTag, can be used for localization
[6]. The center of the marker is the origin of the world frame,
and it is in East North Up (ENU) coordinate format. The
physical center of the camera is considered as the origin of the
body center and it follows North East Down (NED) coordinate
system. The transformation between the two frames gives the
relative pose between marker and camera [7,8]. There are
mainly two transformation methods available one is Euler
angle another is quaternions. Quaternion is a four-dimensional
complex number used to represent transformation. Quaternion
reduces the computational complexity, and it does not have the
problem of gimbal lock [9]. This relative pose can directly send
to any PIXHAWK family flight controllers using the ROS
package called MAVROS [10]. In this article, we describe only
about implementing the AprilTag detection system using ROS.
The paper is divided into the following sections. Section 2
describes the experimental setup used. Section 3 presents the
methodology adopted for implementing the system. Section 4
illustrates the results obtained and their interpretations. Finally,
section 5 concludes this paper.
II. EXPERIMENT AL SET UP AND DESCRIPT IONS
The complete project consists of three parts . The first one is
a downward-facing camera mounted on a quadcopter, second is
an AprilTag marker placed on the ground, and the third is a
slave laptop for visualizing the output data [11,12]. Fig.1
shows the pictorial representation of the entire system. In this
1151
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS 2020)
IEEE Xplore Part Number:CFP20K74-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-4876-2
paper, we did not consider the quadcopter hardware. It was
used just for mounting the camera and the SBC. The SBC was
used for running the main program, and it was connected to a
slave computer (a laptop, for visualizing the output data). The
SBC used was raspberry pi 3 B+. To install ROS on raspberry
pi, Linux OS is required. We installed Ubuntu 18.04 as base
OS, and on top of that ROS version, Melodic Morenia was
installed [13-15]. The important thing is that SBC and slave
computer (laptop) should have the same version of ROS in it.
For WiFi communication, we used a D-Link router as a
hotspot, and this gave a faster data transfer between laptop and
SBC. A dedicated router is required for lag-free visualization
of camera output data. In ROS, we used three prebuilt nodes.
The nodes were modified for our requirements. Table 1 shows
a list of components used and their specifications.
Fig. 1. Pictorial representation of the system.
We took printouts of different Tag IDs of the same
AprilTag family (36h11) in an A4 size paper. We also made
tags of dimensions 10.8x10.8 cm, 12.6x12.6 cm, 15.6x15.6 cm,
20.1x20.1 cm. The tag dimension is the length of the outer
black border.
T able 1. List of components used and their specifications
Components Specification
Raspberry Pi 3B+ Broadcom BCM2837 ARM Cortex-
A53, 1.2GHz Quadcore processor,
1GB LPDDR2 (900 MHz) RAM,
GPU used is Broadcom VideoCore
IV.
Microsoft 5MP, 720p HD camera,73° Field of
LifeCam Cinema view, Pixel size 3µm
D-Link DSL- 2.4 GHz, single band, 150Mbps
2730U WiFi speed
Router
The camera calibration was the first step of this project. We
fixed the camera on a table. A checkerboard of size 8 squares
by 6 squares was used for camera calibration. The size of each
square was 2.39 centimeters. Before starting the camera
calibration node, we run the cv_camera node for getting
outputs from the USB camera connected to SBC. For the
978-1-7281-4876-2/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Gothenburg. Downloaded on July 26,2020 at 16:26:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
camera calibration procedure, we used the camera calibration
ROS node [16-18]. OpenCV libraries were used for creating
the camera node. When we run the camera calibration node, a
Graphical User Interface (GUI) was displayed. We held the
checkerboard in front of the camera; then, we moved the
checkerboard in the field view of the camera until the right side
parameters showed green. We moved the checkerboard
left/right, top/bottom away/near, and tilted position in the field
of view of the camera to get X, Y, size, and skew calibration,
respectively. When all the four bars mentioned above turned
into green, indicating calibration was completed [19-21]. Then
we pressed the calibration button. Then the program started
creating the .yaml file containing calibration parameters. After
this process had completed, we pressed the save button. The
.yaml file was stored in the “~/.ros/camera_info/” directory of
the Linux system.
There are two reference frames in this system. One is the
camera reference frame and the other is the AprilTag reference
frame. The mathematical equation involved in estimating the
relative position between the camera and the charging pad is
given by (1).
(1)
Where is the coordinate of a point P concerning camera
coordinate frame and is the coordinate of a point P
concerning the AprilTag coordinate frame. and are the
rotation matrix and the translation vector of AprilTag frame
relative to the camera frame, respectively.
An experiment was conducted to get the relative pose
between the camera and AprilTag placed on the floor. For this
experiment, we fixed the camera under the quadrotor. We
moved the quadrotor over the AprtilTag to obtain different
relative pose [22-24]. The quadrotor was translated in X, Y, Z
directions and rotated about the roll, pitch and yaw axis.
Another experiment was conducted for measuring the
maximum distance up to which the camera could detect the tag.
We also measured the minimum orientation of the camera to
detect the tag at different distances between the camera and
AprilTag. For this experiment, we fixed the camera on a table
and marked distances at an interval of 1 meter on the floor. At
each marking, AprilTag is placed and observe the detection
[25-28]. We measured the orientation angle by tilting the tag.
The orientation angle is the acute angle between the plane of
tag and camera’s Z-axis or axis normal to the camera’s lens.
The minimum orientation angle was noted. The experiment
was repeated for various tag dimensions.
III. M ET HODOLOGY
Camera calibration is the process of finding out the camera
parameters. For the calibration purpose, we used the
checkerboard method. The critical calibration parameters are
ⅰ) Camera matrix: It is a 3x3 matrix that contains information
regarding the focal length, f, and the optical center (o x, o y ) (It is
the point where the optic axis intersects the image plane). ⅱ)
Distortion Coefficient: It contains parameters corresponding to
radial and tangential distortion. It is a 1x5 matrix. ⅲ)
Rectification Matrix: This matrix defines whether the camera
system used is monocular or stereo. Here we used a monocular
camera. ⅳ) Projection Matrix: It represents a map from 3D to
2D. It is the product of the camera matrix and the
transformation between camera and world coordinates
[11,12,29].
1152
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS 2020)
IEEE Xplore Part Number:CFP20K74-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-4876-2

First, we started the camera node. The Linux terminal to others through the right topics. ROS has an inbuilt command
command to run the camera calibration node is: to display the ROS graph.
“$ rosrun camera_calibration cameracalibrator.py --size
8x6 –square 0.0239 image:=/cv_camera/image_raw camera:=
/cv_camera_node –no-service-check”
Here we used a checkerboard of size 8x6 (in terms of the
number of squares), and each square had a size of 2.39 cm. The
above command opened a Graphical User Interface (GUI), as
shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 3. Block diagrams of all the three nodes created: (a) Camera node (b)
Image processing node (c) AprilTag detection node

Launch files were created for each node. The order of

calling the launch file can be represented as a flow chart, as
Fig. 2. T he camera calibration GUI.
given in Fig.4.

The camera node can capture the image with any USB
webcam. The node captures the image and publishes two
outputs, “image_raw” message, and “camera_info” message.
The “image_raw” is an unprocessed image frame. The
“camera_info” message contains information like image height
and width, location of the camera calibration (.yaml) file. The
resolution of the camera is reduced to 640x480 to increase the
processing speed. Fig.3a shows the structure of the cv_camera
node. The image processing node is to convert the raw image
captured by the camera to a rectified image. The raw image
contains many distortions like radial and tangential. If we
directly feed this to the AprilTag detection node, it may give
erroneous results. The node structure is given in Fig.3b. The
inputs for the AprilTag detection node are the rectified image
and camera calibration parameters. There is one tag
configuration file associated with AprilTag detection node; we
edited the file by inputting values like tag ID numbers (this
system detects only those tags with the ID number provided in
the configuration file) and tag size (in meters) This node can
detect all the tags of the 36h11 AprilTag family. The node
publishes to tag detection topics are “/tag_detections_image”
and transformation “/tf.” “/tag_detections_image” is the same
as input “cv_camera/image_rect,” but the detected tag is
highlighted and also displays the tag ID. “/tf” is the relative
pose between the camera frame and the detected tag. Fig.3c Fig. 4. A flow chart of the order of running launch files in the Linux terminal.
shows the AptilTag node structure.
To see the message passed through the /tf and IV. RESULT S AND DISCUSSIONS
“/tag_detections_image,” we need to give two terminal Fig.5 shows the “.yaml” file output for camera calibration.
commands: “$ rostopic echo /tf” and “$ rqt_image_view.”The All the parameters in the calibration parameter matrices were
“rqt_image_view” is used for visualizing the contents of a node expressed in terms of pixels. To obtain each parameter in
in GUI. Whereas the “rostopic echo” command displays the millimeters, we multiplied the parameters with the size of one
contents on the Terminal window. ROS graph is a pictorial pixel or size of the camera sensor (see Table 1). Therefore,
representation of how all nodes linked to each other. It is a Focal length (f) = 593.487*3*0.001 = 1.779 mm. The optical
great tool to check whether all nodes are appropriately linked centers (o x, o y ) = (332.447, 216.293) = (0.997 mm, 0.649 mm).
Pixel skew (α) is 0. Here the camera coordinate frame and

978-1-7281-4876-2/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE 1153

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Gothenburg. Downloaded on July 26,2020 at 16:26:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS 2020)
IEEE Xplore Part Number:CFP20K74-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-4876-2
world coordinate frame were the same. The projection matrix
obtained was similar to the camera matrix. The camera rotation
matrix was an identity matrix, and the translation vector was
null.
Fig. 5. Camera calibration .yaml file contents.
Fig.6 shows the complete ROS graph of the system. Nodes
were represented as ellipses, and topics were shown as
rectangles. No node was subscribing to (taking input from)
“/tf” topic. The node “image_proc” simultaneously published
to and subscribed from the topic “/cv_camera/image_mono.”
We did not use the contents of the topic
“/cv_camera/image_mono.” This topic only contained the
unrectified monochrome image.
Fig. 6. T he complete ROS Graph.
The detected AprilTag is shown in Fig.7a. The coloured
marking of the detected tag was done to identify the region of
detection. The tag ID was displayed at the center of the
detected marker. In Fig.7a, the tag ID is given as 2. The
relative pose consisted of both translation and rotation, as given
in Fig.7b. The translation was shown in the right hand cartesian
coordinate system while the rotation was given in the
quaternion form. All the displayed values were in meters.
Fig.8 shows the relation between the distance from the
camera to AprilTag and the orientation of the AprilTag for
various tag dimensions. From the experiment, we found that
the maximum detection range increases with an increase in tag
dimension. The maximum detection range for 10.8x10.8cm,
12.6x12.6 cm, 15.6x15.6 cm and 20.1x20.1cm were 4.35m,
5.21m, 6.12m and 8.36m respectively. For distances nearer and
978-1-7281-4876-2/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Gothenburg. Downloaded on July 26,2020 at 16:26:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
above the maximum range, the system took a considerable
amount of time to detect the tag. Also, there were a lot of false
detections that occurred above the maximum range. There was
a steady decrease in detectability with orientation as distance
increases. The minimum detectable angle was almost similar in
all the tags dimensions (around 20°), and it occurred near the
maximu m detectable distance.
Fig. 7. T he two main ROS topic outputs: (a) The detected AprilTag, (b) T he
relative pose between camera and AprilTag.
Also, we observed that there was a minimum detectable
distance between tag and camera. Like maximum detectable
distance, minimum detectable distance also increased with an
increase in the tag dimension. The minimum detection range
for 10.8x10.8cm, 12.6x12.6cm, 15.6x15.6cm and 20.1x20.1cm
re 5.1cm, 8.3cm, 13.4cm and 18.8cm respectively.
Fig. 8. Distance from camera to AprilTag vs. AprilT ag orientation for various
tag sizes.
V. CONCLUSION
The system gave acceptable results. The camera can detect
the marker at medium altitude and moderately large angles of
orientation. To detect AprilTag from a very high altitude, we
should increase the size of the marker. Using markers of
different dimensions helps to land multirotor flying at high
altitude in a step by step manner. That is, the biggest tag helps
in detecting the landing pad or charging pad from high altitude,
1154
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS 2020)
IEEE Xplore Part Number:CFP20K74-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-4876-2
and the smallest tag helps in landing precisely on the charging
pad. This method can be used for precision landing since the
AprilTag detection is robust to orientation. The camera-
carrying quadrotors can detect the tag and gives reasonably
accurate results under unstable flying conditions also. We
observe a delay of 1 sec in detection since the Raspberry Pi is
not a powerful computer for image processing applications.
Choosing an SBC with much more processing speed and
Random Access Memory (RAM) will improve the detection
speed. The obtained pose message from the “/tf” topic is
compatible with the MAVROS message. So it can be directly
sent to any PIXHAWK model FCU using the MAVLink
communication protocol. A free-space optical beam based
drone guidance system is one of the other futuristic research
fields for this type of application [30,31].
REFERENCES
[1] R. Mahony, V. Kumar, and P. Corke, “ Multirotor Aerial Vehicles:
Modeling, Estimation, and Control of Quadrotor,” Robotics Automation
Magazine, IEEE, vol. 19, pp. 20-32, Sept. 2012.
[2] “ ROSConcepts.” [Online]. Available: http://wiki.ros.org/ROS/Concepts.
[Accessed: 10 August 2019].
[3] E. Olson, “ AprilT ag: A robust and flexible visual fiducial system,” in
2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation
(ICRA), 2011, pp. 3400-3407.
[4] J. Wang and E. Olson, “ AprilT ag 2: Efficient and robust fiducial
detection,” in 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent
Robots and Systems (IROS), 2016, pp. 4193-4198.
[5] R. Acuna and V. Willert, “ Dynamic Markers: UAV landing proof of
concept,” in 15th Latin American Robotic Symposium, 6th Brazilian
Symposium on Robotics (SBR) and 9th Workshop on Robotics in
Education (WRE), 2018, pp. 496-502.
[6] G. Zhenglong, F. Qiang and Q. Quan, “Pose Estimation for Multicopters
Based on Monocular Vision and AprilT ag,” in 37th Chinese Control
Conference (CCC), 2018, pp. 4717-4722.
[7] J. Qi, X. Guan and X. Lu, “ An Autonomous Pose Estimation Method of
MAV Based on Monocular Camera and Visual Markers,” in 13th World
Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation (WCICA), 2018, pp.
252-257.
[8] J. Deeds, Z. Engstrom, C. Gill, Z. Wood, J. Wang, I. S. Ahn, Y. Lu,
“ Autonomous Vision-based T arget Detection Using Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle,” in IEEE 61st International Midwest Symposium on Circuits
and Systems (MWSCAS), 2018, pp. 1078-1081.
[9] P. Corke, “Representing Position and Orientation,” in Robotics, Vision
and Control: Fundamental algorithms in MATLAB, 2nd ed.
Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 44-45.
[10] “ ROS.” [Online]. Available: https://ardupilot.org/dev/docs/ros.html.
[Accessed: 3 September 2019].
[11] X. Liang, Y. Du and D. Wei, “ An Integrated Camera Parameters
Calibration Approach for Robotic Monocular Vision Guidance,” in 34th
Youth Academic Annual Conference of Chinese Association of
Automation (YAC), 2019, pp. 455-459
[12] “ Camera Calibration.” [Online]. Available: https://opencv -python-
tutroals.readthedocs.io/en/latest/py_tutorials/py_calib3d/py_calibration/
py_calibration.html. [Accessed: 04 September 2019].
[13] D. V. T hiruvoth, A. A. B. Raj, B. P. Kumar, V. S. Kumar and R. D.
Gupta, “ Dual-Band Shared-Aperture Reflectarray Antenna Element at
Ku-Band for the TT&C Application of a Geostationary Satellite,” in 4th
International Conference on Recent Trends on Electronics, Information,
Communication & Technology (RT EICT ), May 2019, pp. 361-364.
[14] A.B.A. Anthonisamy, P. Durairaj, and L.J Paul, “ Performance Analysis
of Free Space Optical Communication in Open-Atmospheric Turbulence
Conditions with Beam Wandering Compensation Control,” IET Comm. ,
vol. 10, no. 9, pp.1096-1103, Jun. 2016.
[15] S. Batabyal and A. A. Bazil Rai, “ Design of A Ring Oscillator Based
PUF with Enhanced Challenge Response pair and Improved Reliability,”
978-1-7281-4876-2/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Gothenburg. Downloaded on July 26,2020 at 16:26:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2019 4th International Conference on Recent T rends on Electronics,
Information, Communication & Technology (RTEICT), May 2019, pp.
1370-1374.
[16] T . Y. Gite, P. G. Pradeep and A. A. Bazil Raj, “Design and Evaluation of C-
Band FMCW Radar System,” in 2nd International Conference on Trends in
Electronics and Informatics (ICOEI), May 2018, pp. 1274-1276.
[17] H. C.Kumawat, and ArockiaBazil Raj, “Data Acquisition and Signal
Processing System for CW Radar,” 5th International Conference on
Computing Communication Control and Automation (ICCUBEA), Sep.
2019.
[18] A.A. Bazil Raj, and U. Darusalam, “ Performance Improvement of
T errestrial Free-Space Optical Communications by Mitigating the Focal-
Spot Wandering,” J. Modern Opti., vol. 63, no.21, pp.2339-2347, Jun.
2016.
[19] A.A. Bazil Raj, “FPGA- Based Embedded System Developer’s Guide,”
1 st ed., USA: CRC Press, 2018.
[20] A.A. Bazil Raj, J.A. Vijaya Selvi, and S. Raghavan, “ Real-time
Measurement of Meteorological Parameters for Estimating Low Altitude
Atmospheric Turbulence Strength (Cn2)”, IET- Sci. Meas. Tech., vol. 8,
no.6, pp. 459-469, Nov. 2014.
[21] S.R. Nishad and A. A. Bazil Raj, “ Sliding Mode Control of Robotic Gait
Simulator,” 2019 International Conference on Intelligent Computing and
Control Systems (ICCS), May, 2019, pp. 48-53.
[22] A.A.Raj, J.A. Vijaya Selvi,D. Kumar, and N. Sivakumaran, “Mitigation
of beam fluctuation due to atmospheric turbulence and prediction of
control quality using intelligent decision-making tools”, Applied opti.,
vol. 53, no.17, pp.3796-806, Jun. 2014.
[23] Upasana Garg , A A Bazil Raj, and K P Ray, “Cognitive Radar Assisted
T arget T racking: A Study”, in 3rd International Conference on
Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES), Oct. 2018, pp. 427 -
430.
[24] C. Rajkumar and A. A. Bazil Raj, “ Design and Development of DSP
Interfaces and Algorithm for FMCW Radar Altimeter,” in 4th
International Conference on Recent Trends on Electronics, Information,
Communication & Technology (RTEICT), May 2019, pp. 720-725.
[25] L. Prasad and A. A. B. Raj, “ Design of 2D-WH/TS OCDMA PON ONU
Receiver with FLC T echnique,” 2019 4th International Conference on
Recent T rends on Electronics, Information, Communication &
T echnology (RT EICT ), May 2019, pp. 470 -474.
[26] Priyanka Shakya , and A. A. Bazil Raj, “Inverse Synthetic Aperture
Radar Imaging Using Fourier T ransform Technique”, in 1st International
Conference on Innovations in Information and Communication
T echnology (ICIICT ), Apr. 2019,pp. 1-4.
[27] A. Gupta and A. A. Bazil Rai, “ Feature Extraction of Intra-Pulse
Modulated LPI Waveforms Using ST FT ,” 2019 4th International
Conference on Recent T rends on Electronics, Information,
Communication & Technology (RT EICT ), May 2019, pp. 742-746.
[28] D. Gupta, A. A. Bazil Raj and A. Kulkarni, “ Multi-Bit Digital Receiver
Design For Radar Signature Estimation,” in 3rd IEEE International
Conference on Recent T rends in Electronics, Information &
Communication Technology (RT EICT ), May,2018, pp. 1072-1075.
[29] R. Vaishnavi, G. Unnikrishnan and A. A. Bazil Raj, “ Implementation of
algorithms for Point target detection and tracking in Infrared image
sequences,” in 4th International Conference on Recent T rends on
Electronics, Information, Communication & T echnology (RT EICT ),
May 2019, pp. 904-909.
[30] A.A. Bazil Raj, “ Free space optical communication: system design,
modleing, characterization and dealing with turbulence”, 1 st ed., Ghbh:
De Gruyter, 2015.
[31] Arun K Majumder, Zabih Ghassemlooy and A.A. Bazil Raj, “ Principles
and applications of free space optical communications”, 1 st ed., UK:
IET , 2018.
1155