Open AccessSystem evaluation of a practical IEEE 802.15.4/4e/4g multi‐physical and multi‐hop smart utility network
Author(s) -
Sum ChinSean,
Lu Liru,
Zhou MingTuo,
Kojima Fumihide,
Harada Hiroshi
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
iet communications
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.355
H-Index - 62
eISSN - 1751-8636
pISSN - 1751-8628
DOI - 10.1049/iet-com.2014.0240
Subject(s) - phy , computer science , physical layer , frequency shift keying , computer network , orthogonal frequency division multiplexing , personal area network , throughput , interference (communication) , wireless , channel (broadcasting) , telecommunications , demodulation
This study evaluates the performance of a practical IEEE 802.15.4/4e/4g low‐rate (LR) wireless personal area network (WPAN) with multiple physical (PHY) layers and multi‐hop capabilities for smart utility networks, machine‐to‐machine networks and other advanced sensor networks. The proposal includes realistic design considerations addressing demands of practical applications, country‐specific regulatory requirements and technical specification in international standards. A cross‐layer open system interconnection model from the application, transport, network, medium access control, down to the multiple PHY layers is constructed based on the specification in IEEE 802.15.4 LR‐WPAN and other layer‐specific standards. Employing the cross‐layer model, extensive computer simulations were conducted to investigate the performance of the LR‐WPAN system in this application domain. As a result, the authors have successfully verified the simulated achievable average throughput in both PHY layer designs, multi‐rate and multi‐regional frequency shift keying (MR‐FSK) and multi‐rate and multi‐regional orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (MR‐OFDM) with the theoretical throughput by calculation. Secondly, in a multi‐PHY environment with the presence of 30 interferer devices, throughput degradation of the victim system is observed within 30%. Furthermore, when interferer devices transmit frames with interval beyond 1 s, the degradation to the victim system becomes negligible. Thirdly, MR‐FSK PHY has a simpler design with higher energy‐efficiency, whereas MR‐OFDM PHY is more complicated with more resilience to interference. They have found an interference tolerance capability difference of 15 dB between the MR‐FSK and MR‐OFDM systems. Fourthly, comparing with their single‐hop counterparts, multi‐hop systems have lower average throughput in MR‐FSK by 25% and MR‐OFDM by 10%. Finally, comparing with networks with periodical beacon transmissions, asynchronous networks have more inferior average throughput of 20% in MR‐FSK and 3% in MR‐OFDM, with the advantage of longer battery lifespan.