Coexistence Empirical Study and Analytical Model for Low-Rate WPAN and IEEE 802.11b

Howitt, I.; Shukla, Abhishek

doi:10.1109/wcnc.2008.164

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While the Fig. 1 Cluster-based dual-radio WSN architecture coexistence issues of IEEE 802.15.4 and IEEE 802.11 have been studied in existing literature [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11], main concern of previous research is on how independent IEEE 802.11 network and IEEE 802.15.4 network interfere with each other when the overlapping channels used by those two networks.…”

Section: Cluster-based Dual-radio Wsn Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on this measurement, the traffic over each background link is set to 8 Kbps. 2 The size of each background link packet is set to 40 bytes including the protocol header. Figure 6 shows the results.…”

Section: Channel Orthogonalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In[1], Angrisani et al experimentally examined on the coexistence issues under a variety of configurations and scenarios. Experimental measurement results on interference between the two radios were also reported in[2][3][4][5]. In[6],Petrova et al measured the dual radio interference using IEEE 802.11n equipments.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Interference mitigation in wireless sensor networks using dual heterogeneous radios

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scalability is one of the most important features that future wireless sensor networks (WSNs) should provide, and clustering is widely considered as a viable approach for high scalability. In the cluster-based architecture, the cluster heads play a key role in relaying messages between the sensor nodes and the sink. While the cluster heads are involved in both intra-cluster and intercluster communication, the latter typically requires transmission over much longer distance than the former. In this paper, we consider a scenario in which each cluster head is equipped with dual radios: IEEE 802.15.4 and IEEE 802.11 for intra-cluster and inter-cluster communication, respectively. IEEE 802.11 links between the cluster heads and the sink provide a high capacity backbone for large-scale WSNs. IEEE 802.15.4 and IEEE 802.11 share a lot of similarities including CSMA/CA MAC. Their operating spectrum also overlaps at the 2.4 GHz ISM band, and this may cause interference. We first experimentally measure how severe the interference can be, when two radios are concurrently used in a WSN. We, then, propose an interference mitigation solution which relies on adaptive aggregation of packets and adaptive transmission scheduling. Through prototyping and experimental evaluation, we show that the proposed scheme significantly reduces the interferences between the two types of radios.

show abstract

Section: Cluster-based Dual-radio Wsn Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Channel Orthogonalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interference mitigation in wireless sensor networks using dual heterogeneous radios

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are many ways to describe the receiving MAC frame behavior in 802.15.4 coexistence studies and the most common one is packet loss [10] [27], and others are packet delivery [18], packet error [7], packet collision [9], etc. All of the criterions have the same essence which is to describe the receiving of MAC frame under interference.…”

Section: Mac Layermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(4) with SINR in (3), PF FO NT TP BER , , , , , 2 = Carrier frequency offset between interferer (IEEE 802.11) and victim (IEEE 802.15.4) is very important to analyze the interference. In [9], Howitt and Shukla analyzed the relationship between the SINR with the frequency offset between the interference (IEEE 802.11) and victim (IEEE 802.15.4) signal. = More performance parameters affected by interference are analyzed in [12], such as transmission delay (TD) and throughput (TH) of MAC layer frame.…”

Section: Analysis Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coexistence of IEEE802.15.4 based networks: A survey

Yang

Gidlund

2010

IECON 2010 - 36th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wireless networks based on IEEE 802.15.4 have paid great attention to the coexistence problem between themselves and with other non-IEEE 802.15.4 wireless networks. This problem has been further emphasized by two new industry wireless standards, WirelessHART and ISA100 that are set to meet special industry requirements. In this paper, we firstly review the current solutions and analysis models in this field, and summarize the characters of different studies. Then, based on the survey study, we point out some new interests and development trend of future research. Finally, we discuss about some open research issues and suggest some solutions.

show abstract

MAC-Layer Packet Loss Models for Wi-Fi Networks: A Survey

Silva

Pedroso

2019

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technical reports indicate that wireless and mobile devices will account for 71% of all IP traffic by 2022, an increase of 19% over four years. This increase is related to advances in wireless data communication technologies. Wireless networks have become one of the most important ways to connect devices to the Internet, therein improving productivity and encouraging information sharing. IEEE 802.11, known as Wi-Fi, has become the main standard for wireless local area networks. The most important metrics for measuring the quality of Wi-Fi are delay, jitter, and packet loss. Packet loss occurs when one or more packets fail to reach their destination and can occur for a variety of reasons. Packet loss influences the user's perceived quality of applications over Wi-Fi networks, mainly multimedia and real-time applications. The availability of accurate models for packet loss in Wi-Fi networks enables the development of more efficient methods for performance analysis and network design, as well as better computational simulations. Modeling packet loss in such networks presents a major challenge because packets may be lost for many different reasons, including signal attenuation, noise, multipathing, signal refraction, thermal noise, competition for media access and buffer issues. In this paper, we provide an overview of the causes of packet loss and a comprehensive survey of the available models for packet loss in Wi-Fi networks. The potential benefits of the survey are: (i) the systematic presentation of available packet loss models for Wi-Fi networks, their parameters, and respective packet loss rate evaluation, (ii) comparison of models considering validation scenarios and input parameters, and (iii) description of open issues and future research directions. We hope that our analysis will help researchers understand the most important characteristics of the packet loss process in Wi-Fi networks and the strengths and weaknesses of the main packet loss models.INDEX TERMS Gilbert-Elliot model, packet loss model, packet loss rate, Wi-Fi communication.

show abstract

Coexistence Empirical Study and Analytical Model for Low-Rate WPAN and IEEE 802.11b

Cited by 11 publications

References 10 publications

Interference mitigation in wireless sensor networks using dual heterogeneous radios

Interference mitigation in wireless sensor networks using dual heterogeneous radios

Coexistence of IEEE802.15.4 based networks: A survey

MAC-Layer Packet Loss Models for Wi-Fi Networks: A Survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About