1 / 32

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF COMMON POWER ROUTING FOR AD-HOC NETWORK

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF COMMON POWER ROUTING FOR AD-HOC NETWORK. Zhan Liang Supervisor: Prof. Sven-Gustav Häggman Instructor: Researcher Boris Makarevitch Helsinki University of Technology Communications Laboratory 18th, May, 2004. Contents. Background Objectives Introduction

affrica
Download Presentation

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF COMMON POWER ROUTING FOR AD-HOC NETWORK

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF COMMON POWER ROUTING FOR AD-HOC NETWORK Zhan Liang Supervisor: Prof. Sven-Gustav Häggman Instructor: Researcher Boris Makarevitch Helsinki University of Technology Communications Laboratory 18th, May, 2004

  2. Contents • Background • Objectives • Introduction • Implementation • Evaluation of COMPOW • Conclusion • Future Work

  3. What is Ad-hoc • A local area network, or some small networks, parts are time-limited, and only usable for the duration of a communication session • The routers are free to move randomly, organize themselves arbitrarily • The wireless topology vary rapidly and unpredictably

  4. Background • Many power control methods are designed and implemented over Ad-hoc network’s routing protocols (CLUSTERPOW, COMPOW, MINPOW, etc.) • Few evaluation reports on the power control methods can be found

  5. Why power control methods? • A big effect on improving network capacity • A higher transmit power: • a higher range and a higher signal-to-noise ratio to the receiver • more interference to the adjacent nodes. • Power control  reduce the interfering nodes  improve the capacity • Energy Savings

  6. Objectives • To implement a common power control method (COMPOW) over one Ad-hoc network’s routing protocol, AODV • To evaluate this power control method

  7. Introduction • Ad-hoc routing protocols • Power control methods

  8. Ad-hoc routing protocols(1) • Table-driven: all the nodes know the routing information of the whole network • Source-initiated: routes are established only when the source nodes require them

  9. Ad-hoc routing protocols(2)

  10. Table-driven routing protocols Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector (DSDV) • To find the shortest paths, the least hops • A routing table where all the routing information is stored

  11. Source-initiated routing protocols(1)Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) • A route cache to cache the known routes to the destinations • Main routing functions: • Route discovery • Route maintenance

  12. Source-initiated routing protocols(2)Ad-hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) (1) • A combination of both DSR and DSDV protocols • The basic route-discovery and route-maintenance of DSR, • The hop-by-hop routing, sequence numbers and beacons of DSDV

  13. Source-initiated routing protocols(3)Ad-hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) (2) • Route discovery:

  14. Power control methods(1) • COMPOW (COMmon POWer) control method • CLUSTERPOW (CLUSTERing POWer) control method • MINPOW (MINimum POWer) control method

  15. Power control methods(2)COMPOW • All the nodes use the same power level, the lowest power level at which the network is connected

  16. Power control methods(3)CLUSTERPOW • To separate nodes into several different clusters

  17. Power control methods(3)MINPOW • Each node chooses the transmit power level

  18. Implementation of COMPOW(1)Simulation Assumptions (1) • Simulation Environment: NS2 • Network card: CISCO Aironet 350 • The channel is bi-directional link • The free space loss with two ray ground reflection model

  19. Implementation of COMPOW(2)Simulation Assumptions (2) • The antennas are omni directional (same gain and attenuation in all horizontal directions) • The MAC layer protocol: IEEE 802.11b

  20. Implementation of COMPOW(3)COMPOW over AODV: Route Discovery procedure

  21. Implementation of COMPOW(4)Architecture

  22. Implementation of COMPOW(5)Functions included in Simulation • Route Discovery • Route Maintenance • Route Release • Route Error handle

  23. Evaluation of COMPOWTesting Scenarios • Scenario 1: 10 fixed nodes, 10 pairs of connection, 100 seconds, 250 m^2 • Scenario 2: 25 fixed nodes, 25 pairs of connection, 100 seconds, 625 m^2 • Scenario 3: 25 mobile nodes, 25 pairs of connection, 1000 seconds, 1000*1000 m^2

  24. Results:Throughput vs. Load for fixed nodes (TCP)

  25. Results:Throughput vs. Load for fixed nodes (UDP)

  26. Results:Energy Consumption vs. Load for fixed nodes (TCP)

  27. Results:Energy Consumption vs. Load for fixed nodes (UDP)

  28. Results:Throughput vs. Load for mobile nodes

  29. Results:Energy Consumption vs. Load for mobile nodes

  30. Conclusions • A network transmitting packets by TCP: COMPOW performs good • A network transmitting packets by UDP: the lifetime of the COMPOW network may be even shorter than that of the network without using power control methods

  31. Future works • More complicated scenarios’ test  acquire a complete evaluation • Non-uniform load generation environment • Other Ad-hoc routing protocols  a more complete evaluation of COMPOW

  32. Q & A Thank you for your attention!

More Related