1 / 22

Effect of Power Control in Forwarding Strategies for Wireless Ad-Hoc Networks

Effect of Power Control in Forwarding Strategies for Wireless Ad-Hoc Networks. Supervisor:- Prof. Swades De Presented By:- Aditya Kawatra 2004EE10313 Pratik Pareek 2004EE10336. Problem Statement.

abra-porter
Download Presentation

Effect of Power Control in Forwarding Strategies for Wireless Ad-Hoc Networks

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. Effect of Power Control in Forwarding Strategies for Wireless Ad-Hoc Networks Supervisor:- Prof. Swades De Presented By:- Aditya Kawatra 2004EE10313 Pratik Pareek 2004EE10336

  2. Problem Statement • To model the power consumption and effective interference for forwarding strategies like NFP, LRD, and Random Transmission in wireless ad-hoc networks • Using the above, evaluate total power consumption for a unit forward distance, and the no. of retransmissions required. • Also, to verify in the light of above analysis the best forwarding strategy, which is NFP as of now (based on one-hop Transmission Probability, Interference Factor and Throughput [1])

  3. Introduction • In previous work, Interference Zone (IZ) effects have not been taken into account. • In this zone, nodes can sense the carrier signal from transmitting nodes, but cannot decode the data. Usually RI=2RT The solid circle is the transmission zone (of radius RT) and the dotted circle is the interference zone boundary (of radius RI)

  4. Introduction (contd.) • But if particular intended receiving node (Y) receives simultaneous signals from its interfering nodes  probability of decoding error (~BER) increases • Thus, the aim is to predict a probabilistic interference at Y (in terms of SIR) • Some basic assumptions are – • The transmission protocol followed is a simple CSMA (Carrier Sense Multiple Access) instead of the usual slotted ALOHA [2] and a Poisson process node distribution • Initially, no power control is assumed, i.e. all Txs occur at full power. Later pdf of a receiving node [1] will be factored in along with other complexities

  5. Introduction (contd…) • Time lag between data transmission and reception at any node is assumed negligible. So with CSMA, all IZ nodes will instantaneously sense Tx carrier and keep quiet • Nodes in IZ will also keep quiet if nodes from outside transmit, i.e. they can fall in the interference zone of some external transmitting node. This possibility is ignored as we want to conduct a worst-case analysis.

  6. Analysis Where, is the probability of there being total ‘i’ nodes in the total shaded area . is the probabilistic interference considering that only j nodes are exclusive interferers (j<=i), given that there are total n nodes in the shaded region The expression for the expected value of interference will be –

  7. Analysis (Contd..)

  8. Interference due to One Effective Transmitting Node Ap (in Green) is the area common to the Interference region of N1 and the total shaded area. An (in Pink) is the compliment area to Ap in the total shaded region region. Pr(r,α)kis the probability of k nodes present in the Ap region Prc(r,α)1-k is the probability of (1-k) nodes present in the An region

  9. Interference due to two effective transmitting nodes

  10. Interference due to three effective transmitting nodes

  11. General Result So the general result of interference due to j nodes, when n nodes are present in the crescent is given by :- Here, Inj is the Interference due to j nodes, when there are a total of n nodes in the shaded region. Pr (r,α)k is the probability of k nodes present in the Ap region Pr c(r,α)1-kis the probability of (1-k) nodes present in the An region

  12. Simulation Results and Plots • As the probability of occurrence of nodes in the region is governed by the Poisson process, the graph of the total interference peaks at the average value, ie. λA. • Similarly, In3 and In2 also peak at the same value. • But, In1 shows a unique characteristic. It peaks at a value less than the average value,(λA). This is because, the no. of effective one node interference cases decreases as the total no. of nodes increase. This decrease shifts the peak of In1 towards left.

  13. “Brute force” algorithm • To simulate the Poisson distribution of nodes a large square area (dimensions >> RI) was taken and the average number of nodes (= λ*square area) were randomly positioned. • A list is created of all the nodes located in the total shaded region (= n) and a transmitting nodes only sub-list is randomly assigned based on probability of transmission. • Then a random order within the transmitting nodes is selected and finally after isolating the nodes which are exclusive of each others’ interference zones, the final effective interfering nodes are determined (= j). • The approriate Inj is updated and finally each of these is divided by the total number of iterations.

  14. Comparison between Analysis and Brute Force Results • Results obtained from Brute Force simulation andAnalysis show a significant match. • This match increases on increasing the no. of iterations in the Brute Force Simulation. • The shape of the two results are also consistent, i.e they peak at the same value. • This value is very close to the average no. of nodes in the shaded region i.e. λA.

  15. Other Simulation Results and Plots • The value of I2 and I3 increases as d/R is increased, while I1 decreases for the same. • As d/R increases the total no. of nodes in the total shaded region (possible interferers) increases thus decreasing the probability of one effective interfering node I vs d/R

  16. I vs d/R for 2 values of λ • The Interference value increases as the receiver moves away (i.e. d/R increases). • This can be explained by the increased number of nodes in the shaded region, when d/R is increased. • This graph suggests that by varying λ, we do not see a significant change in total interference.

  17. SIR vs d/R • The signal to interference ratio (SIR) decreases as d/R is increased. • When d/R is very small, the power received is large and also the interference is low. So, the SIR value is very high. • As Interference also monotonically increases with d/R, the SIR curve continues to show a decrease with increasing d/R.

  18. Future Work • Incorporate the Power Control Strategy (i.e. NFP, LRD and the Random Txn) in the analysis and the simulations for calculating the excepted Interference. • Use these results to obtain for each strategy ,the Energy per unit forward progress (single hop). Average no. of retransmissions • The equation derived as of now is :-

  19. References • [1] Ting-Chao Hou and Victor O.K. Li, “Transmission Range Control in Multihop Packet Radio Networks”, in IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. COM-34, January 1986 • [2] Eun-Sun Jung and Nitin H. Vaidya, “A Power Control MAC Protocol for Ad Hoc Networks”, in MOBICOM’02, September 23-28 2002 • Swades De, Chunming Qiao, Dimitri A. Pados, Mainak Chatterjee and Sumesh J. Philip, “An Integrated Cross-Layer Study of Wireless CDMA Sensor Networks”, in IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, Vol. 22, No.7, September 2004

More Related