a study on the spectrum efficient multi-hop wireless network

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 3.1: Simulation Parameters Parameter Value Simulated time 900 seconds WLAN protocol 802.11g Bit rate 11 Mbps Station transmission power 0.05 mW Encoding type 1 Constant Bit Rate (CBR) Packet Inter-Arrival time 0.25 seconds Packet size 64 byte (512 bits) Encoding type 2 Variable Bit Rate (VBR) Packet Inter-Arrival time Packet size 1 second 17280byte Routing Protocol Parameters Active Route Timeout Hello Interval Neighbor Hold Time Topology Hold Time 3sec (Default) 2 seconds 6 seconds 15 seconds In order to describe the movement behavior of mobile users especially in indoor environment, mobility models are used for simulation and evaluation purposes. The mobility model indicates the change in location, velocity and acceleration over time for the mobile users. Both AODV and OLSR showed similar behavior for the mobility model. In my work, I didn’t consider the random way model nor did I simulate the new proposed model, instead I assigned the movement path for each station with the desired speed in the network prior to simulation. My main focus was the station speed movement while moving through the corridor of the building. In addition, I only focused on AODV in this work due to its better overall performance in mobility and from the results from the pervious work as shown in Fig 3.2. 19
Figure 3.2: AODV vs. OLSR Another difference between my work and the pervious one is the metric used for evolution. Instead of using throughput for performance assessment, PDR was used as a metric for ART evaluation against mobility speed, number of stations and number of hops. OPNET defines throughput as the “total number of bits (in Mbits/sec) forwarded from wireless LAN layers to higher layers in all WLAN nodes of the network”. However, this doesn’t count the dropped packets in case of collision. For that reason we measured PDR for every scenario in the performed simulations. 3.3 Comparison with other Related Researches A performance comparison between two On-Demand routing protocols Ad hoc on-demand Distance Vector (AODV) and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) was simulated in Ref [2] for 15 stations. In comparison, my research simulates the Packet Delivery Rate (PDR) improvement for AODV routing protocol (AODV achieve better results in [2] compared to DSR) using Active Route Timeout (ART) for 50, 60 and 70 stations. Reference [14] studies the impact of mobility and user density on the performance of routing protocol for the purpose of designing a new routing protocol. I draw similarity in the simulation of mobility and user density effect on the performance of routing protocol. However, this research proposed a solution to the mobility problem in terms of 20
Page 1: A STUDY ON THE SPECTRUM EFFICIENT M
Page 4 and 5: Copyright @ 2009 by WADHAH HAFIDH A
Page 6 and 7: 、上記条件下で、4 m/s
Page 8 and 9: The WMN experiments showed that the
Page 10 and 11: Table of Contents Abstract in Japan
Page 12 and 13: List of Figures Figure 1.1: Infrast
Page 14 and 15: List of Tables Table 2.1: Compariso
Page 16 and 17: CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1.1 IEEE 802
Page 18 and 19: The performance of a random media a
Page 20 and 21: 1.4 Interference problem Interferen
Page 22 and 23: On the other hand, the backbone net
Page 24 and 25: CHAPTER 2 Mobile Ad-hoc Network 2.1
Page 26 and 27: Route Request AODV Intermediate nod
Page 28 and 29: Request (RREQ) [4] in order to iden
Page 30 and 31: DATA Motion Figure 2.4: Higher mobi
Page 32 and 33: CHAPTER 3 Packet Delivery Rate (PDR
Page 36 and 37: oute stat hold time parameter in th
Page 38 and 39: speed values due to the ability of
Page 40 and 41: Figure 3.7:Coverage area and moveme
Page 42 and 43: Figure 3.8: Simulated Ad-hoc mobile
Page 44 and 45: Figure 3.9: Example of Convergence
Page 46 and 47: oute. This caused the 10m/s speed t
Page 48 and 49: Figure 3.14: Number of users vs. Me
Page 50 and 51: Figure 3.16: Simulated Ad-hoc mobil
Page 52 and 53: 3.9 Chapter summary Four simulation
Page 54 and 55: suppressing channel interference is
Page 56 and 57: The two radios provide the ability
Page 58 and 59: Figure 4.4: Interference in Multi-r
Page 60 and 61: Figure 4.6: Phase Shift and cancel
Page 62 and 63: As mentioned before, it was shown i
Page 64 and 65: Basically, the experiments are cate
Page 66 and 67: Figure 5.2: AirMagnet Surveyor inte
Page 68 and 69: The directional coupler is a passiv
Page 70 and 71: Figure 5.7: Throughput vs. SIR (Int
Page 72 and 73: Figure 5.10: Three hop WMN with two
Page 74 and 75: Table 5.2:Throughput of Mutli-hop W
Page 76 and 77: PathLoss ( dB) = 40 + [35log10 D( m
Page 78 and 79: Figure 5.17: Actual Interference ca
Page 80 and 81: Figure 5.20: Attenuation value vs.
Page 82 and 83: Figure 5.22 illustrates the S 21 pa
Page 84 and 85:
link. The experimental results show
Page 86 and 87:
Scenario A.1 This scenario simulate
Page 88 and 89:
Destination address Table Table A.1
Page 90 and 91:
Figure B.2: Attenuation value vs. t
Page 92 and 93:
[10] S Gowrishankar, T G Basavaraju
Page 94 and 95:
[32] Jing Zhu and Roy, S., “802.1
show all

a study on the spectrum efficient multi-hop wireless network

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?