Study The Effect of Mobility & Node Density On The Performance of Ad Hoc Network

Study the effect of mobility
& node density on the

Performance of Ad Hoc
Network
Submitted By
Rupanita Das(M.Tech 4th Sem ECE (KIST))
Regd No-0907214018
guided by
Mr.Banoj Ku Panda(Prof. AE&I)
08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 1
Content
Introduction
MaNet Protocols
Reactive Protocols
DSR/AODV
Work Done
References

Mobile Ad-Hoc Network
Collection of mobile Conferences/Meetings

nodes forming a
temporary network Disaster Recovery
No centralized
administration or Battlefields
standard support services
Each Host is an
independent router

MaNet Protocols
Proactive Protocols Reactive Protocols
Table driven On Demand
Continuously evaluate Route discovery by
routes some global search
Large network E.g. DSR,AODV etc
capacity to keep info.
Most routing info.
may never be used.
E.g.-DSDV

Ad Hoc Routing
Every node participates in routing: no distinction between
“routers” and “end nodes”
No external network setup: “self-configuring”
Especially useful when network topology is dynamic
(frequent network changes – links break, nodes come and
go)

Ad Hoc Routing Protocols
DSR: Dynamic Source Routing
Source routing protocol
AODV: Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector Routing
“Hop-by-hop” protocol
Both are “on demand” protocols: route information

discovered only as needed

Dynamic Source Routing(DSR)
 It uses Source routing.
Source routing: entire path to destination supplied by
source in packet header.
 Entries in route caches are updated as nodes learn new
routes.

DSR Protocol Activities
Route discovery
Undertaken when source needs a route to a destination
Route maintenance
Used when link breaks, and specified path is unusable.

Route Discovery
Route Request:
Source broadcasts Route Request (RREQ) message for
specified destination
RREQ format
< source_addr, dest_addr, request_id, record >
Route Reply
Destination unicasts Route Reply (RREP) message to
the source

Route Maintenance
Two types of packets used: Route Error Packet (RERR)and
Acknowledgement(ACK).
If transmission error is detected at data link layer, Route
Error Packet is generated and send to the original sender of
the packet.
The node removes the path from its route cache when a
Route Error packet is received
ACKs are used to verify the correction of the route links.

Ad-Hoc On-demand Distance
Vector Routing (AODV)Protocol
It uses Table driven routing i.e. one entry per destination.
Sender tries to find destination:

 broadcasts a Route Request Packet (RREQ).
Nodes maintain route cache and use destination sequence

number for each route entry

AODV Protocol Activities
Route discovery
Undertaken whenever a node needs a “next hop” to forward
a packet towards the destination.
Route maintenance
Used when link breaks, next hop unusable.

Route Discovery
Route Request:
Source broadcasts Route Request (RREQ) message for
specified destination
RREQ format
< source_IPaddr, source_sequence-# , broadcast_id,
dest_IPaddr, dest_sequence_#, hop_cnt >
RREQ uniquely identified by <source_IPaddr ,
broadcast_id>
Route Reply
Destination unicasts Route Reply (RREP) message to source
RREP contains IP _addr of both source & destination.

Route Maintenance
Used when link breakage occurs
Link breakage detected by link-layer ACK.
Route Error (RERR) message generated

Contains list of unreachable destinations
Sent to “precursors”: neighbors who recently sent
packet which was forwarded over broken link

WORK DONE

Simulation Study
Study the effect of mobility on MANET
Study the effect of node density on MANET
Study the effect of mobility and terrain area on MANET
Simulation tool- GloMoSim

Study the effect of mobility on MANET
In this part I have vary the pause time from 0s-900s

corresponding to a network of 50 nodes .
Performance Metrices
The following metrics are chosen for analyzing the performance
of Adhoc network using the routing protocols AODV & DSR.
They are as follows
 Packet Delivery Fraction
 End-to-End Delay
 Number of link break

Packet Delivery Fraction (PDF)
Ratio between number of packets delivered to the
destination and total number of packets generated by
sources.
Here we have study the Packet delivery fraction (P)
for10,20 &30 sources. The other parameter used for
simulation are listed below.

Parameters used for simulation
Specification Value/Specification
1
Terrain Area 500Mx300M
Number of Nodes 50
Node Mobility model Random Waypoint
Number of sources 10 ,20 and 30
Maximum Speed 20 M/S
Pause time 0 S to 900 S
Simulation Time 15 M
Mac Protocol 802.11
Routing Protocol AODV,DSR
Packet size 512 bytes
Data rate 2 Mbps
Type of Data traffic CBR (Constant Bit Rate)
Rupanita Das 19
Packet Delivery Fraction For
AODV &DSR Of 10 Sources
P a c k e t d e liv e ry f ra c t io n (% )
Packet Delivery Fraction vs Pause time For 10Source

1
AODV
0.9 DSR
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pause time(s)
High packet delivery in AODV due to low packet drop & low
in DSR due to high packet drop in source routing area.


0.95
AODV
0.9 DSR
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
pause time(s)
Here Aodv shows higher packet delivery fraction than DSR.


1
0.95 AODV
DSR
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pause time(s)
AODV have better packet delivery than DSR

End-to-End Delay
 End-to-End Delay-: All possible delays during route
discovery, queuing at the interface queue,
retransmission delay and propagation and transfer
times.
i.e. It includes buffering, queuing at interface,
retransmission, propagation delay
Ti = Tbuffer + Tqueue+ Ttransfer +Tretransmission+ Tpropagation

End-to-End Delay(s) vs Pause time(s)
for10 Sources Of Aodv &Dsr
A v g e n d -t o -e n d d e la y (s )
Avg end-to-end delay vs Pausetime for 10 sources

0.055
0.05 AODV
DSR
0.045
0.04
0.035
0.03
0.025
0.02
0.015
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pause time(s)
AODV shows high end-to-end delay due to more link break.

Avg end-to-end delay vs Pausetime for 20Source
0.085
A v g e n d -t o -e n d d e la y (s )
0.08
AODV
0.075 DSR
0.07
0.065
0.06
0.055
0.05
0.045
0.04
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Pause time(s)
Here also delay is more in AODV than DSR

Avg end-to-end delay vs Pausetime for 30Sources
0.5
A v g e n d - t o - e n d d e la y ( s )
0.45
AODV
0.4 DSR
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pause time(s)
Here also delay is more in AODV than DSR

Link-to-Link Break
Link-to-Link Break: It includes the link breaks when
packet travel from source to destination.

Link-to-Link Break For 10Sources Of
Aodv &Dsr
Link-to-Link break VS Pause time for 10Sources
1400
AODV
DSR
1200
lin k -t o -lin k b re a k
1000
800
600
400
200
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Pause time(s)
DSR indicates high link breaks due to use of stale routes.

Link-to-Link Break of 20Sources for
Aodv &Dsr
3000
AODV
DSR
2500
lin k - t o - lin k b r e a k
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pause time(s)
Here is also DSR shows high link breaks due to use of stale
routes.
Link-to-Link Break For 30Sources
Of Aodv &Dsr
3500
AODV
DSR
3000
lin k -t o -lin k b re a k
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pause time(s)
DSR indicates high link breaks due to use of stale routes.

Effect of Node density on MANET
In this part we have considered the metric i.e. the Packet
Delivery Fraction for the different node densities in
different simulation time.
Based on the number of nodes the network classified into

3 types. They are as follows.
1. Small sized network with 10 numbers of nodes.
2. Medium sized network with 50 numbers of nodes.
3. Large sized network with 100 numbers of nodes.

Parameter used in Simulation
Parameters Specifications
Terrain area 1500Mx300M

Network size 10,50 and 100
No. of source and destination 30% of nodes

Pause time 300s
Maximum speed 20M/S
Simulation time 0s-900s
Mac protocol 802.11
Routing protocols AODV,DSR
Types of data traffic CBR(Continues Bit Rate)

Packet Delivery Fraction For AODV &DSR
in Small sized network
Packet Delivery Fraction vs Simulation time For Node10
0.95
0.9
0.85
AODV
DSR
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Simulation time(s)
PDF of AODV is better than DSR in small sized network.

in Medium sized network
1
0.95
0.9
AODV
0.85 DSR
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Simulation time(s)
PDF of AODV is better than DSR in medium sized network.

Packet Delivery Fraction For AODV
&DSR in Large sized network
1
P a c k e t d e liv e r y f r a c t io n (% )
0.95
AODV
0.9 DSR
0.85
0.8
0.75
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Simulation time(s)
PDF of AODV is better than DSR in large sized network.

Effect of mobility& terrain area
In this part we have considered the metric for the

different terrain area with different pause time.
They are as follows.
1. Small terrain area (500x150) with 50 numbers of
nodes for pause time 0,400 & 900s.
2. Medium terrain area (1000x250) with 50 numbers of
3. Large terrain area (1500x300) with 50 numbers of

Parameters used for simulation
Parameters Specification
Terrain Area 500Mx150M,1000Mx250M,
1500Mx300M
Number of nodes 50
Node mobility Model Random Waypoint
Number of Sources node 30% of node
Maximum Speed 20 M/S
Pause time 0s,400s,900s
Simulation Time 15m
Mac Protocol 802.11
Routing protocol AODV,DSR
Type of data traffic CBR(Continues Bit Rate)

Packet Delivery Fraction in Small terrain
area For AODV &DSR with Pause tme=0s
Packet Delivery Fraction vs Simulation time For Node50 Area=500*150 and Pausetime=0sec
1
0.98
0.96
0.94 AODV
DSR
0.92
0.9
0.88
0.86
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Simulation time(s)
PDF of DSR is better than AODV in high mobility condition

Packet Delivery Fraction in Small terrain
area for AODV &DSR with Pause time=400s
1
P a c k e t d e li v e r y f r a c t io n ( % )
0.95
AODV
DSR
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Simulation time(s)
In the medium mobility condition DSR still perform better than AODV

&DSR in Small Terrain area with Pause
time=900s
1
0.95
AODV
DSR
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Simulation time(s)
In the low mobility condition DSR still perform better than AODV

&DSR in Medium terrain area with
Pause time=0s
1
0.95
AODV
0.9 DSR
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Simulation time(s)
In the high mobility condition AODV perform better than DSR

Packet Delivery Fraction in Medium terrain
area For AODV &DSR with Pause
time=400s
1
0.95
P a c k e t d e liv e ry fra c t io n (% )
AODV
0.9 DSR
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Simulation time(s)
In the medium mobility condition AODV is still perform better than DSR

Packet Delivery Fraction in medium terrain
area For AODV &DSR with Pause time=900s Packet Delivery Fraction vs Simulation time For Node50 Area=1000*250 and Pausetime=900sec
1
P a c k e t d e liv e ry f r a c t io n (% )
0.95
AODV
0.9 DSR
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Simulation time(s)
In the low mobility condition AODV is still perform better than DSR
in Large terrain area with Pause time=0s
1
P a c k e t d e liv e r y f r a c t io n (% )
0.95
AODV
0.9 DSR
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Simulation time(s)
In the high mobility condition AODV perform better than DSR

1
0.95
0.9 AODV
DSR
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Simulation time(s)
In the medium mobility condition AODV is still perform better than DSR

1
0.95
0.9 AODV
DSR
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0.5
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Simulation time(s)
In the low mobility condition AODV is still perform better than DSR

Conclusion
Effect of mobility on manet-
Packet Delivery Fraction- In AODV with low network load and high
mobility scenario the PDF is high compare to high network load. That
means as the number of sources increases the PDF decreases. This is
because with increase in network load the routing load also increases
which leads to non availability of routes from source to the destination.
In DSR with low network load (i.e. 10 sources) and high
mobility scenario(i.e. zero pause time) the packet delivery fraction is less
than AODV .It is due to continuous link break and use of stale route. In
high network load (i.e. 20 and 30 sources), with low mobility scenario
the PDF of DSR is increases.
So we can say that AODV outperform DSR in both low and
high mobility condition.

End-to end delay-
contd.
AODV shows more delay than DSR in both low and high
mobility condition this is due to the use of Table driven routing in
DSR.
Number of link break-
DSR shows more no. of link break in both high and low
mobility condition compare to AODV .This is due to the use of stale
route in DSR.
Effect of node density on Manet-
From the plot we can conclude that the PDF of
AODV is better than DSR with increase in node density .This is due
to less no. of link break in AODV.

Contd.
Effect of mobility and terrain area on Manet-
In the Small terrain area with high, medium and low mobility
condition DSR shows high PDF than AODV this is due to use of
source routing in DSR.
In the Medium terrain area with high, medium and low
mobility condition AODV shows high PDF than DSR. This due
to less no. of link break in AODV.
In the Large terrain area with high, medium and low
mobility condition the PDF of DSR still decreases.

References
Charles e.perkins,Nokia Research Center
Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET): Routing Protocol
Performance Issues and Evalution Considerations (RFC 2501)
Ad hoc On-demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing
The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks
(DSR)
Simulation Environment for an Ad-Hoc Wireless Network Running
the AODV Routing Algorithm.
C.E Perkins, E.M. Royer and S.R.Das, ”Ad hoc on Demand
Distance Vector Routing, ” IETF internet draft (draft – ietf-
manet- aodv-06.txt), July 2000.
 [6] E .M. Royer, P .M. Melliar-Smith, L .E Moser, ”Ananalysis of
the optimum node density for ad hoc mobile Networks,”Proc.
ICC-2001, Vol.3, pp. 857-861, (June 2001).
Thank You.

Study The Effect of Mobility & Node Density On The Performance of Ad Hoc Network

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Study The Effect of Mobility & Node Density On The Performance of Ad Hoc Network

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Study the effect of mobility

& node density on the

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 2

Collection of mobile Conferences/Meetings

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 3

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 4

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 5

Both are “on demand” protocols: route information

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 6

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 7

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 8

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 9

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 10

Sender tries to find destination:

Nodes maintain route cache and use destination sequence

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 11

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 12

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 13

Route Error (RERR) message generated

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 14

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 15

Simulation tool- GloMoSim

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 16

In this part I have vary the pause time from 0s-900s

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 17

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 18

Packet Delivery Fraction vs Pause time For 10Source

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 20

Packet Delivery Fraction vs Pause time For 20Source

Here Aodv shows higher packet delivery fraction than DSR.

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 21

Packet Delivery Fraction vs Pause time For 30Source

AODV have better packet delivery than DSR

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 22

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 23

Avg end-to-end delay vs Pausetime for 10 sources

AODV shows high end-to-end delay due to more link break.

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 24

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Here also delay is more in AODV than DSR

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 25

Here also delay is more in AODV than DSR

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 26

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 27

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

DSR indicates high link breaks due to use of stale routes.

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 28

DSR indicates high link breaks due to use of stale routes.

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 30

Based on the number of nodes the network classified into

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 31

Terrain area 1500Mx300M

No. of source and destination 30% of nodes

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 32

PDF of AODV is better than DSR in small sized network.

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 33

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

PDF of AODV is better than DSR in medium sized network.

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 34

PDF of AODV is better than DSR in large sized network.

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 35

In this part we have considered the metric for the

08/29/2021 Rupanita Das 36