Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
AN EFFICIENT ENERGY CONSERVATION IN HETEROGENEOUS
MOBILE ADHOC NETWORK
1
GUIDED BYMrsVBhanumathiAsst Prof Dept Of ECEAnna University of Technology Coimbatore
PRESENTED BYPNGaneshII year ME Communication SystemsAnna University of Technology Coimbatore
OBJECTIVE
To reduce the energy consumption and to improve the end-to-end
delay performance
To prolong the lifetime of the network with some P-node
existence
2
3
EXISTING PROBLEMS
P-nodersquos in B-nodersquos Vicinity
Path selection
Transmission range of P-node
Transmission scheduling
4
LITERATURE SURVEY
Energy Aware Routing protocol
P-node and B-node has same transmission range in the network and
this protocol should minimize the total energy consumed by the
Network
EAR increases the number of hops to reach the destination which
leads to energy drain in the network
EAR does not know how to provide MAC layer acknowledgments for
P-node in unidirectional links
5
DEAR ndash A Device and Energy Aware Routing protocol
Arun avudainayagam and WLou simulated the DEAR where it faced
some disadvantages
DEAR used modified version of MACA was used in MAC layer
where it prevents the collision in the network
Here the minimum cost to reach the P-node is done after the routing
table is updated
Once a P-node receives a packet it checks for the destination is one of
its neighbour in just a single hop
If not the P-node boost its transmission range
6
Operation of EAR Minimum hop route and DEAR
7
Algorithm-Design of DELAR
P-nodersquos neighboring criteria
Routing component of DELAR
Hybrid Transmission scheduling
Asymmetric Media Access Control protocol
Multi-Packet Transmission Scheme
8
P-nodersquos neighbor Discovery
The forward path and backward path are decided for the neighbour selection the
forward path is the path derived from the routing table
For TRpb ie any B-node X located in Prsquos transmission range has the backward
path (PX) ie the minimum hop forward path (XP) all the nodes have the
transmission range of BTR
Forward paths are for any nodes in the network whereas backward path are valid
only between a P-node and the B-node in the TRpb
All the intermediate nodes along backward path(PX) should be in Prsquos TRpb so
they may be Prsquos neighbor
TRpb = n times BTR for covering B-nodes and TRpp = m times BTR to find neighbor
among themselves
9
Routing component of DELAR
β(i) = residual_energy(i) minus μ times queue_len(i)
residual energy(i) ndash remaining energy level at node i
queue_len(i) ndash current load status at node i
μ ndash energy consumption per unit data transmission
1β(i) β(i) gt γ
cost(i) =
a β(i) le γ
γ ndash parameter used to adjust the weight in overall cost
a ndash large value to be used
10
Hybrid transmission scheduling
Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node
P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines the
lengths of P-to-P period P-to-B period and B-to-B period
length of P-to-P period is tpp = lk k - neighboring P-node
length of P-to-B period is tpb = dmi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-
node is mi
length of B-to-B period is tbb = qb b - neighboring B-node
Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
OBJECTIVE
To reduce the energy consumption and to improve the end-to-end
delay performance
To prolong the lifetime of the network with some P-node
existence
2
3
EXISTING PROBLEMS
P-nodersquos in B-nodersquos Vicinity
Path selection
Transmission range of P-node
Transmission scheduling
4
LITERATURE SURVEY
Energy Aware Routing protocol
P-node and B-node has same transmission range in the network and
this protocol should minimize the total energy consumed by the
Network
EAR increases the number of hops to reach the destination which
leads to energy drain in the network
EAR does not know how to provide MAC layer acknowledgments for
P-node in unidirectional links
5
DEAR ndash A Device and Energy Aware Routing protocol
Arun avudainayagam and WLou simulated the DEAR where it faced
some disadvantages
DEAR used modified version of MACA was used in MAC layer
where it prevents the collision in the network
Here the minimum cost to reach the P-node is done after the routing
table is updated
Once a P-node receives a packet it checks for the destination is one of
its neighbour in just a single hop
If not the P-node boost its transmission range
6
Operation of EAR Minimum hop route and DEAR
7
Algorithm-Design of DELAR
P-nodersquos neighboring criteria
Routing component of DELAR
Hybrid Transmission scheduling
Asymmetric Media Access Control protocol
Multi-Packet Transmission Scheme
8
P-nodersquos neighbor Discovery
The forward path and backward path are decided for the neighbour selection the
forward path is the path derived from the routing table
For TRpb ie any B-node X located in Prsquos transmission range has the backward
path (PX) ie the minimum hop forward path (XP) all the nodes have the
transmission range of BTR
Forward paths are for any nodes in the network whereas backward path are valid
only between a P-node and the B-node in the TRpb
All the intermediate nodes along backward path(PX) should be in Prsquos TRpb so
they may be Prsquos neighbor
TRpb = n times BTR for covering B-nodes and TRpp = m times BTR to find neighbor
among themselves
9
Routing component of DELAR
β(i) = residual_energy(i) minus μ times queue_len(i)
residual energy(i) ndash remaining energy level at node i
queue_len(i) ndash current load status at node i
μ ndash energy consumption per unit data transmission
1β(i) β(i) gt γ
cost(i) =
a β(i) le γ
γ ndash parameter used to adjust the weight in overall cost
a ndash large value to be used
10
Hybrid transmission scheduling
Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node
P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines the
lengths of P-to-P period P-to-B period and B-to-B period
length of P-to-P period is tpp = lk k - neighboring P-node
length of P-to-B period is tpb = dmi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-
node is mi
length of B-to-B period is tbb = qb b - neighboring B-node
Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
3
EXISTING PROBLEMS
P-nodersquos in B-nodersquos Vicinity
Path selection
Transmission range of P-node
Transmission scheduling
4
LITERATURE SURVEY
Energy Aware Routing protocol
P-node and B-node has same transmission range in the network and
this protocol should minimize the total energy consumed by the
Network
EAR increases the number of hops to reach the destination which
leads to energy drain in the network
EAR does not know how to provide MAC layer acknowledgments for
P-node in unidirectional links
5
DEAR ndash A Device and Energy Aware Routing protocol
Arun avudainayagam and WLou simulated the DEAR where it faced
some disadvantages
DEAR used modified version of MACA was used in MAC layer
where it prevents the collision in the network
Here the minimum cost to reach the P-node is done after the routing
table is updated
Once a P-node receives a packet it checks for the destination is one of
its neighbour in just a single hop
If not the P-node boost its transmission range
6
Operation of EAR Minimum hop route and DEAR
7
Algorithm-Design of DELAR
P-nodersquos neighboring criteria
Routing component of DELAR
Hybrid Transmission scheduling
Asymmetric Media Access Control protocol
Multi-Packet Transmission Scheme
8
P-nodersquos neighbor Discovery
The forward path and backward path are decided for the neighbour selection the
forward path is the path derived from the routing table
For TRpb ie any B-node X located in Prsquos transmission range has the backward
path (PX) ie the minimum hop forward path (XP) all the nodes have the
transmission range of BTR
Forward paths are for any nodes in the network whereas backward path are valid
only between a P-node and the B-node in the TRpb
All the intermediate nodes along backward path(PX) should be in Prsquos TRpb so
they may be Prsquos neighbor
TRpb = n times BTR for covering B-nodes and TRpp = m times BTR to find neighbor
among themselves
9
Routing component of DELAR
β(i) = residual_energy(i) minus μ times queue_len(i)
residual energy(i) ndash remaining energy level at node i
queue_len(i) ndash current load status at node i
μ ndash energy consumption per unit data transmission
1β(i) β(i) gt γ
cost(i) =
a β(i) le γ
γ ndash parameter used to adjust the weight in overall cost
a ndash large value to be used
10
Hybrid transmission scheduling
Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node
P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines the
lengths of P-to-P period P-to-B period and B-to-B period
length of P-to-P period is tpp = lk k - neighboring P-node
length of P-to-B period is tpb = dmi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-
node is mi
length of B-to-B period is tbb = qb b - neighboring B-node
Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
4
LITERATURE SURVEY
Energy Aware Routing protocol
P-node and B-node has same transmission range in the network and
this protocol should minimize the total energy consumed by the
Network
EAR increases the number of hops to reach the destination which
leads to energy drain in the network
EAR does not know how to provide MAC layer acknowledgments for
P-node in unidirectional links
5
DEAR ndash A Device and Energy Aware Routing protocol
Arun avudainayagam and WLou simulated the DEAR where it faced
some disadvantages
DEAR used modified version of MACA was used in MAC layer
where it prevents the collision in the network
Here the minimum cost to reach the P-node is done after the routing
table is updated
Once a P-node receives a packet it checks for the destination is one of
its neighbour in just a single hop
If not the P-node boost its transmission range
6
Operation of EAR Minimum hop route and DEAR
7
Algorithm-Design of DELAR
P-nodersquos neighboring criteria
Routing component of DELAR
Hybrid Transmission scheduling
Asymmetric Media Access Control protocol
Multi-Packet Transmission Scheme
8
P-nodersquos neighbor Discovery
The forward path and backward path are decided for the neighbour selection the
forward path is the path derived from the routing table
For TRpb ie any B-node X located in Prsquos transmission range has the backward
path (PX) ie the minimum hop forward path (XP) all the nodes have the
transmission range of BTR
Forward paths are for any nodes in the network whereas backward path are valid
only between a P-node and the B-node in the TRpb
All the intermediate nodes along backward path(PX) should be in Prsquos TRpb so
they may be Prsquos neighbor
TRpb = n times BTR for covering B-nodes and TRpp = m times BTR to find neighbor
among themselves
9
Routing component of DELAR
β(i) = residual_energy(i) minus μ times queue_len(i)
residual energy(i) ndash remaining energy level at node i
queue_len(i) ndash current load status at node i
μ ndash energy consumption per unit data transmission
1β(i) β(i) gt γ
cost(i) =
a β(i) le γ
γ ndash parameter used to adjust the weight in overall cost
a ndash large value to be used
10
Hybrid transmission scheduling
Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node
P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines the
lengths of P-to-P period P-to-B period and B-to-B period
length of P-to-P period is tpp = lk k - neighboring P-node
length of P-to-B period is tpb = dmi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-
node is mi
length of B-to-B period is tbb = qb b - neighboring B-node
Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
5
DEAR ndash A Device and Energy Aware Routing protocol
Arun avudainayagam and WLou simulated the DEAR where it faced
some disadvantages
DEAR used modified version of MACA was used in MAC layer
where it prevents the collision in the network
Here the minimum cost to reach the P-node is done after the routing
table is updated
Once a P-node receives a packet it checks for the destination is one of
its neighbour in just a single hop
If not the P-node boost its transmission range
6
Operation of EAR Minimum hop route and DEAR
7
Algorithm-Design of DELAR
P-nodersquos neighboring criteria
Routing component of DELAR
Hybrid Transmission scheduling
Asymmetric Media Access Control protocol
Multi-Packet Transmission Scheme
8
P-nodersquos neighbor Discovery
The forward path and backward path are decided for the neighbour selection the
forward path is the path derived from the routing table
For TRpb ie any B-node X located in Prsquos transmission range has the backward
path (PX) ie the minimum hop forward path (XP) all the nodes have the
transmission range of BTR
Forward paths are for any nodes in the network whereas backward path are valid
only between a P-node and the B-node in the TRpb
All the intermediate nodes along backward path(PX) should be in Prsquos TRpb so
they may be Prsquos neighbor
TRpb = n times BTR for covering B-nodes and TRpp = m times BTR to find neighbor
among themselves
9
Routing component of DELAR
β(i) = residual_energy(i) minus μ times queue_len(i)
residual energy(i) ndash remaining energy level at node i
queue_len(i) ndash current load status at node i
μ ndash energy consumption per unit data transmission
1β(i) β(i) gt γ
cost(i) =
a β(i) le γ
γ ndash parameter used to adjust the weight in overall cost
a ndash large value to be used
10
Hybrid transmission scheduling
Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node
P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines the
lengths of P-to-P period P-to-B period and B-to-B period
length of P-to-P period is tpp = lk k - neighboring P-node
length of P-to-B period is tpb = dmi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-
node is mi
length of B-to-B period is tbb = qb b - neighboring B-node
Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
6
Operation of EAR Minimum hop route and DEAR
7
Algorithm-Design of DELAR
P-nodersquos neighboring criteria
Routing component of DELAR
Hybrid Transmission scheduling
Asymmetric Media Access Control protocol
Multi-Packet Transmission Scheme
8
P-nodersquos neighbor Discovery
The forward path and backward path are decided for the neighbour selection the
forward path is the path derived from the routing table
For TRpb ie any B-node X located in Prsquos transmission range has the backward
path (PX) ie the minimum hop forward path (XP) all the nodes have the
transmission range of BTR
Forward paths are for any nodes in the network whereas backward path are valid
only between a P-node and the B-node in the TRpb
All the intermediate nodes along backward path(PX) should be in Prsquos TRpb so
they may be Prsquos neighbor
TRpb = n times BTR for covering B-nodes and TRpp = m times BTR to find neighbor
among themselves
9
Routing component of DELAR
β(i) = residual_energy(i) minus μ times queue_len(i)
residual energy(i) ndash remaining energy level at node i
queue_len(i) ndash current load status at node i
μ ndash energy consumption per unit data transmission
1β(i) β(i) gt γ
cost(i) =
a β(i) le γ
γ ndash parameter used to adjust the weight in overall cost
a ndash large value to be used
10
Hybrid transmission scheduling
Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node
P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines the
lengths of P-to-P period P-to-B period and B-to-B period
length of P-to-P period is tpp = lk k - neighboring P-node
length of P-to-B period is tpb = dmi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-
node is mi
length of B-to-B period is tbb = qb b - neighboring B-node
Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
7
Algorithm-Design of DELAR
P-nodersquos neighboring criteria
Routing component of DELAR
Hybrid Transmission scheduling
Asymmetric Media Access Control protocol
Multi-Packet Transmission Scheme
8
P-nodersquos neighbor Discovery
The forward path and backward path are decided for the neighbour selection the
forward path is the path derived from the routing table
For TRpb ie any B-node X located in Prsquos transmission range has the backward
path (PX) ie the minimum hop forward path (XP) all the nodes have the
transmission range of BTR
Forward paths are for any nodes in the network whereas backward path are valid
only between a P-node and the B-node in the TRpb
All the intermediate nodes along backward path(PX) should be in Prsquos TRpb so
they may be Prsquos neighbor
TRpb = n times BTR for covering B-nodes and TRpp = m times BTR to find neighbor
among themselves
9
Routing component of DELAR
β(i) = residual_energy(i) minus μ times queue_len(i)
residual energy(i) ndash remaining energy level at node i
queue_len(i) ndash current load status at node i
μ ndash energy consumption per unit data transmission
1β(i) β(i) gt γ
cost(i) =
a β(i) le γ
γ ndash parameter used to adjust the weight in overall cost
a ndash large value to be used
10
Hybrid transmission scheduling
Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node
P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines the
lengths of P-to-P period P-to-B period and B-to-B period
length of P-to-P period is tpp = lk k - neighboring P-node
length of P-to-B period is tpb = dmi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-
node is mi
length of B-to-B period is tbb = qb b - neighboring B-node
Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
8
P-nodersquos neighbor Discovery
The forward path and backward path are decided for the neighbour selection the
forward path is the path derived from the routing table
For TRpb ie any B-node X located in Prsquos transmission range has the backward
path (PX) ie the minimum hop forward path (XP) all the nodes have the
transmission range of BTR
Forward paths are for any nodes in the network whereas backward path are valid
only between a P-node and the B-node in the TRpb
All the intermediate nodes along backward path(PX) should be in Prsquos TRpb so
they may be Prsquos neighbor
TRpb = n times BTR for covering B-nodes and TRpp = m times BTR to find neighbor
among themselves
9
Routing component of DELAR
β(i) = residual_energy(i) minus μ times queue_len(i)
residual energy(i) ndash remaining energy level at node i
queue_len(i) ndash current load status at node i
μ ndash energy consumption per unit data transmission
1β(i) β(i) gt γ
cost(i) =
a β(i) le γ
γ ndash parameter used to adjust the weight in overall cost
a ndash large value to be used
10
Hybrid transmission scheduling
Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node
P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines the
lengths of P-to-P period P-to-B period and B-to-B period
length of P-to-P period is tpp = lk k - neighboring P-node
length of P-to-B period is tpb = dmi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-
node is mi
length of B-to-B period is tbb = qb b - neighboring B-node
Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
9
Routing component of DELAR
β(i) = residual_energy(i) minus μ times queue_len(i)
residual energy(i) ndash remaining energy level at node i
queue_len(i) ndash current load status at node i
μ ndash energy consumption per unit data transmission
1β(i) β(i) gt γ
cost(i) =
a β(i) le γ
γ ndash parameter used to adjust the weight in overall cost
a ndash large value to be used
10
Hybrid transmission scheduling
Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node
P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines the
lengths of P-to-P period P-to-B period and B-to-B period
length of P-to-P period is tpp = lk k - neighboring P-node
length of P-to-B period is tpb = dmi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-
node is mi
length of B-to-B period is tbb = qb b - neighboring B-node
Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
10
Hybrid transmission scheduling
Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node
P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines the
lengths of P-to-P period P-to-B period and B-to-B period
length of P-to-P period is tpp = lk k - neighboring P-node
length of P-to-B period is tpb = dmi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-
node is mi
length of B-to-B period is tbb = qb b - neighboring B-node
Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
11
Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
Based on IEEE 80211 A-MAC introduce 4 frames P-RTS P-CTS P-
DATA P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods
The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTSP-CTSP-DATAP
ACK exchanges
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
12
The Multi packet transmission scheme
During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within Arsquos BTR range
If multi-packet transmission is enabled A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part
By this the end-to-end delay is improved
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
13
Simulation setup
Tools Network simulator 234
Number of nodes 30
Area 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range 200m
Transmission rate 2Mbps
Mobility Model RandomWay point
Simulation time 500s
Vmax 2 ms to 16 ms
No of P-Nodes 2 4 amp 6
Initial energy of nodes 1KJ
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
14
Simulation setup contd
Pause time 0
Packet size 512 bytes
Value of m and n 4 and 2
Transmission power 1560 mW
Reception power 930 mW
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
15
Simulation Results - I
Impact of the node mobility
Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
16
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
17
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
18
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
19
Simulation Results - II
Impact of the number of P-nodes
Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
20
AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
21
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
22
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
23
Simulation Results - III
Impact of the Traffic Load
Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
24
PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
25
AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
Future work
To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol)
The choice of m and n
26
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
REFERENCES
[1] W Liu Y Zhang W Lou and Y Fang (2011) ldquoDELAR A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networksrdquo
IEEE J Sel Areas Commun vol 29 no 8 pp 1572-1584
[2] A Avudainayagam W Lou and Y Fang (2003) ldquoDEAR A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing vol 63 no 2 pp 228ndash
236
27
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
28
[3] M Pearlman and Z Haas (1999) ldquoDetermining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocolrdquo IEEE J Sel Areas
Commun vol 17 no 8 pp 1395ndash1414
[4] Shah V Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007) ldquoHandling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networksrdquo in Computer Networks Vol
51 pp 2594ndash2615
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002) ldquoA power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networksrdquo in Proc MobiCom
THANK YOU
29
THANK YOU
29
