evaluate and analysis of mac protocols for vanet
DESCRIPTION
Released by permission of Dr Ali Al-Sherbaz. Work is by Mina Alaa Hussein The project aims to evaluate and analyse of Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol for Vehicular Ad hoc Networks (VANETs) to achieve high reliability and low delay delivery of safety related messages as well as provide QoS requirements for non-safety messagesTRANSCRIPT
1
Evaluate and Analysis of MAC Protocols for VANET
By Mina Alaa Hussein
Supervisor:Assist. Prof. Dr. Mohammed A. Abdala
Dr. Ali Al-Sherbaz
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
2
Aim of Project
Introduction
Background of multi-channel protocol
The problems
Simulation
Results
Conclusion
Contents:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
3
Aim of Project
Introduction
Background of multi-channel protocol
The problems
Simulation
Results
Conclusion
Contents:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
4
The project aims to evaluate and analyse of Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol for Vehicular Ad hoc Networks (VANETs) to achieve high reliability and low delay delivery of safety related messages as well as provide QoS requirements for non-safety messages.
Aim of Project:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
5
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
SITUATIONS to be CONSIDERED
Wish to know about traffic jam condition at next turn or road condition ahead
Wish to avoid accidents or have advance information if any met with an accidents on the road ahead
6
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
SITUATIONS to be CONSIDERED
Wish to have prior alert, of vehicle in front of you is applying breaks
7
Aim of Project
Introduction
Background of multi-channel protocol
The problems
Simulation
Results
Conclusion
Contents:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
8
VANET (Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks): is the technology of building a robust Ad-Hoc network between mobile vehicles and between mobile vehicle and roadside units
VANETs are classified as an application of Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) that has the potential in improving road safety and in providing travelers comfort.
VANET applications are classified into two types, safety application and non-safety applications.
Compared with MANET, VANET has more frequent path loss, a shorter link life-time, and lower packet throughput as a result of high mobility, road environment, and volume of traffic.
Introduction:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
9
Typical VANET Scenario :
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
10
Predictable mobility
Providing safe driving, improving passenger comfort and enhancing traffic efficiency
No power constraints
Variable network density
Rapid changes in network topology
Large scale network
High computational ability
Characteristic of VANET:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 11
Aim of Project
Introduction
Background of multi-channel protocol
The problems
Simulation
Results
Conclusion
Contents:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 12
IEEE WAVE MAC Protocol (IEEE 802.11p+IEEE 1609.4)
IEEE 802.11p uses CSMA/CA provide data rate from 3 to 27 mbps and bandwidth with 10
MHz and communication distance from 300-1000 m distance.
uses EDCA QoS extension defined in IEEE 802.11e. IEEE 1609.4 standard enhances the operation of
IEEE802.11P by supporting multi-channel operation
Implemented protocol in OMNET:
Figure 1. Channel allocation for WAVE according to FCC
13
Data rates : 6 to 54Mbpssignal bandwidth : 20
MHzSymbol duration: 4 ㎲Guard Time: 0.8 ㎲FFT period: 3.2 ㎲Preamble duration: 16 ㎲CW min: 15CW max: 1023
04/09/2023 07:32 PM
Wi-Fi802.11 a/b/g
WAVE802.11P
Data rates : 3 to 27 Mbps
Signal bandwidth : 10 MHz
Symbol duration : 8㎲Guard Time : 1.6 ㎲FFT period: 6.4 ㎲Preamble duration: 32 ㎲CW min: 15CW max: 1023
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 14
WAVE protocol stack:
Implemented part
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 15
Aim of Project
Introduction
Background of multi-channel protocol
The problems
Simulation
Results
Conclusion
Contents:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 16
Problems of Multi-Channel operation:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 17
Aim of Project
Introduction
Background of multi-channel protocol
The problems
Simulation
Results
Conclusion
Contents:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 18
OMNeT++ is a popular open source simulator
SUMO (Simulation of Urban Mobility)
Veins is an open source framework for running vehicular network simulations.
Simulation :
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 19
Scenarios:Scenarios: Multi-channel & Single-channel
highway
Low density
Queue size=1
A B
Queue size=2
A B
Queue size=5
A B
High density
Queue size=1
A B
Queue size=2
A B
Queue size=5
A B
Case A: Beacon length=100, packet length= 800Case B: Beacon length=400, packet length= 1000
Implemented Using
Only Safety messages
OrSafety & non-safety
messages
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 20
Highway scenario:
M1 junction 14 to junction 15
Street length: 2 Km Number of lanes=3 Speed range: 80 km/h
(50 m/h) to 160 km/h (100 m/h)
acceleration=2.6 m/s² Length of
vehicle=5,10 m Min. Gap=2.5 m Krauss Mobility Model
Number of vehicle: Low density:
~12vehicle/km/lane High density:
~25vehicle/km/lane
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 21
Simulation Parameters:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 22
SUMO and OMNET++ running :
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 23
Aim of Project
Introduction
Background of multi-channel protocol
The problems
Simulation
Results
Conclusion
Contents:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 24
Simulation Results: Only safety messages used
low density, single channel
high density, single channel
low density,multi channel
high density, multi channel
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
2.711 2.601 4.232 3.6022.863 2.77
4.936 3.652.687 2.56
4.373.6022.659 2.79
3.9393.6552.73 2.79
4.1833.6552.681 2.564
4.183
3.655
Beacon Delay -msec
Q=1,B=100,P=800 Q=2,B=100,P=800 Q=5, ,B=100,P=800Q=1,B=400, P=1000 Q=2,B=400, P=1000 Q=5,B=400, P=1000
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 25
Simulation Results: Only safety messages used
low density, single channel
high density, single channel
low density,multi channel
high density, multi channel
00.20.40.60.8
11.21.41.61.8
2
0.0728 0.126 0.073319 0.12030.082 0.138 0.0809 0.130.159
0.511
0.1514 0.120840.296
0.4985
0.27410.47
0.289
0.4985
0.0716
0.470.074
0.127
0.0716
0.47006
Beacon Throughput- Mbps
Q=1,B=100,P=800 Q=2,B=100,P=800 Q=5, ,B=100,P=800Q=1,B=400, P=1000 Q=2,B=400, P=1000 Q=5,B=400, P=1000
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 26
Simulation Results: Only safety messages used
low density, single channel
high density, single channel
low density,multi channel
high density, multi channel
Q=1,B=100,P=800
900
2272
8908
4689
Q=2,B=100,P=800
Q=5, ,B=100,P=800
Q=1,B=400, P=1000
Q=2,B=400, P=1000
Q=5,B=400, P=1000
2500
7500
12500
Lost Packet
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 27
Simulation Results: both safety and non-safety messages used
low density, single channel
high density, single channel
low density,multi channel
high density, multi channel
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
3.23 3.987 4.681 4.0663.399 4.095 4.761 4.1213.316
4.2754.584
4.3683.234.006
4.9254.2613.2405
4.3484.868
4.2653.39
4.5093.7013
4.5453
Beacon Delay- msec
Q=1,B=100,P=800 Q=2,B=100,P=800 Q=5, ,B=100,P=800Q=1,B=400, P=1000 Q=2,B=400, P=1000 Q=5,B=400, P=1000
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 28
Simulation Results: both safety and non-safety messages used
low density, sin-gle channel
high density, sin-gle channel
low density,multi channel
high density, multi channel
Q=1,B=100,P=800
3.814 4.174 51.531 51.28
Q=2,B=100,P=800
4.128 4.927 52.928 53.7
Q=5, ,B=100,P=800
4.69 6.897 55.08 57.37
Q=1,B=400, P=1000
4.128 4.347 51.879 51.6
Q=2,B=400, P=1000
4.316 5.3594 52.98 53.83
Q=5,B=400, P=1000
5.462 7.4603 53.579 58.181
25
75
125
175
225
275
325
Data Delay- msec
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 29
Simulation Results both safety and non-safety messages used
low density, single channel
high density, single channel
low density,multi channel
high density, multi channel
Q=1,B=100,P=800
263108.9 449010 21361 42883
Q=2,B=100,P=800
322750 579715 49288 93207
Q=5, ,B=100,P=800
360661 707406 183571 20568
Q=1,B=400, P=1000
270792 412153 21503 45313
Q=2,B=400, P=1000
258173 535779 46743 85325
Q=5,B=400, P=1000
289075 629671 104445 205710
250000
1250000
2250000
3250000
Lost Packet
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 30
Simulation Results: both safety and non-safety messages used
low density, single channel
high density, single channel
low density,multi channel
high density, multi channel
Q=1,B=100,P=800
0.0386 0.0437 0.06923 0.122
Q=2,B=100,P=800
0.036 0.041429 0.0798 0.128
Q=5, ,B=100,P=800
0.0349 0.0394 0.147 0.1186
Q=1,B=400, P=1000
0.1339 0.171 0.285 0.466
Q=2,B=400, P=1000
0.128 0.0383 0.2689 0.463
Q=5,B=400, P=1000
0.1259 0.142 0.2871 0.475
0.10.50.91.31.7
Throughput of Beacon- Mbps
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 31
Simulation Results:
both safety and non-safety messages used
low density, single channel
high density, single channel
low density,multi channel
high density, multi channel
Q=1,B=100,P=800
0.05131 0.02905 0.00505 0.00236
Q=2,B=100,P=800
0.0454 0.02928 0.00627 0.00349
Q=5, ,B=100,P=800
0.0462 0.0291 0.01085 0.00537
Q=1,B=400, P=1000
0.0626 0.0369 0.005599 0.003005
Q=2,B=400, P=1000
0.055 0.06511 0.008599 0.00435
Q=5,B=400, P=1000
0.0559 0.03265 0.0144 0.006415
0.025
0.125
0.225
0.325
Throughput of Data - Mbps
Q=1,B=100,P=800 Q=2,B=100,P=800 Q=5, ,B=100,P=800Q=1,B=400, P=1000 Q=2,B=400, P=1000 Q=5,B=400, P=1000
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 32
By setting CWmin=500
Enhancing the protocol:
CWmin=15 CWmin=2550
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
21361
8951
lost packetImproved
58%
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 33
By setting CWmin=500
Enhancing the protocol:
CWmin=15 CWmin=2550.067
0.068
0.069
0.07
0.071
0.072
0.073
0.074
0.06923
0.073108
Beacon Throughput- MbpsIncrease
d 5%
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 34
By setting CWmin=500
Enhancing the protocol:
CWmin=15 CWmin=2554.35
4.4
4.45
4.5
4.55
4.6
4.65
4.7 4.68
4.473
Beacon Delay- msecDecreased
5%
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 35
By setting CWmin=500
Enhancing the protocol:
CWmin=15 CWmin=25549
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
51.531
55.43
Data Delay- msecIncrease
d 5%
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 36
By setting CWmin=500
Enhancing the protocol:
CWmin=15 CWmin=2550
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0.012
0.014
0.00505
0.012266
Data Throughput- MbpsIn-
creased 58%
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 37
Aim of Project
Introduction
Background of multi-channel protocol
The problems
Simulation
Results
Conclusion
Contents:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 38
For safety messages scenario:Throughput of beacon:
For both safety and non-safety messages scenario:
Conclusion:
Single-channel>Multi-channel• For low density [25.6%]• For high density [6%]
Single-channel
low density< high density [67%]
Multi-channellow density< high
density [59%]
Single-channel<Multi-channel• For low density [56%]• For high density [73%]
Single-channel
low density> high density [4%]
Multi-channel
low density< high density
[35.8%]
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 39
For safety messages scenario:Delay of beacon:
For both safety and non-safety messages scenario:
Conclusion:
Single-channel<Multi-channel• For low density [36%]• For high density [26%]
Single-channellow density≈ high
density
Multi-channellow density> high density [15.5%]
• For low density Single-channel<Multi-channel[28%]• For high density Single-channel ≈ Multi-channel
Single-channellow density< high density [21.4%]
Multi-channellow density> high
density [6%]
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 40
For safety messages scenario:Lost Packets:
For both safety and non-safety messages scenario:
Conclusion:
Single-channel<Multi-channel• For low density [70%]• For high density [46%]
Single-channel
low density< high density [67%]
Multi-channellow density< high
density [41%]
Single-channel>Multi-channel• For low density [75%]• For high density [85%]
Single-channellow density< high density [46.7%]
Multi-channellow density< high
density [13%]
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 41
Conclusion: For both safety and non-
safety messages scenario:
Data Delay:
Data Throughput:
Single-channel<Multi-channel• For low density [91%]• For high density [89%]
Single-channel
low density< high density [21%]
Multi-channellow density< high
density [2%]
Single-channel>Multi-channel• For low density [83%]• For high density [88%]
Single-channel
low density> high density [29.7%]
Multi-channellow density>high
density [50%]
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 42
For only safety messages
single-channel protocol better than multi-channel
protocol
For both safety and non-safety messages
multi-channel protocol better than single-channel
protocol
Conclusion:
04/09/2023 07:32 PM 43
Enhancing IEEE 802.11p single-cahnnel protocol by using CWmin= 500.
Develop the protocol for multi-hop system.
Test the protocol performance in urban scenario and investigate the effect of obstacles.
What is next?
4404/09/2023 07:32 PM