Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
p
] that solve the following optimization
problem:
maximize
min
subject to
i
min i ;
Rmesh Amesh s S o;
ok = 1;
min
0
; Amesh
0
;
0s o s 1
;
III. USER-DEPLOYED AND CAPACITY EVALUATION
FOR RURAL COMMUNITIES IN NICARAGUA
A. Description of User-deployed approach
We assume a simple user-deployed behavior. The
community starts by locating their own nodes at their locations
(telecenters) and the shared Internet access node (gateway)
located at the closes land-based infrastructure. At the
communities under consideration there are two municipalities
headend (towns) where it is possible to have access to land-
based Internet services: San Juan de Limay and San Juan del
Rio Coco. The geographical coordinates are shown in the
Table II. In San Juan de Limay the operator Claro ENITEL
has a 63m height tower, and we assume that a similar tower
could be utilized (or is available) in San Juan del Rio Coco.
By utilizing these gateways we can group the communities
into two potential user-deployed subnetworks as shown in Fig.
3. We call subnetwork 1 to the set of communities that are
geographically closer to ENITEL in San Juan de Limay, and
subnetwork 2 to the set of communities closer to San Juan del
Rio Coco. Since in this paper the procedure for community-
deployed approach is similar to our previous work, we will not
elaborate more see [1].
TABLE II
GEOGRAPHICAL COORDINATES FOR INTERNET GATEWAYS
B. Capacity evaluation for subnetwork 1
We apply the described method before together with the
above user-deployed network, and also utilizing
omnidirectional with transmitter antenna gain of 16 dBi and
beam-steering system with antenna gain of 23 dBi (HPBW
stands for Half-power beamwidth). The capacity evaluations
(maximum end-to-end transmission rate o throughput) for
Wimax subnetwork 1 are summarized in Table III:
TABLE III
CAPACITY EVALUATION FOR SUBNETWORK 1 (-)
Antenna
System
IM [dB] Antenna
Gain [dBi]
Uplink
(rate/node)
Downlink
(rate/node)
Total
rate
Omni 2 16 115kbps 1.2Mbps 8.8
Mbps
Beam-
steering
(HPBW
=30)
2 23 233kbps 2.3Mbps 18.0
Mbps
Beam-
steering
(HPBW
=30)
5 23 517kbps 5.2Mbps 40
Mbps
* Communities: San Luis, La Fraternidad, San Lorenzo, El Carizo, El ngel,
El Mojn, San Juan de Limay (gateway). IM = Interference Margin.
Fig. 3. Subnetwork 1 and subnetwork 2. Source: Map was derived using
Google Earth'. Google INC.
We can note that utilizing an interference margin (IM) of
5dB and Beam-steering antennas produces higher end-to-end
data rate. This is because when utilizing IM=2dB with beam-
steering antennas, the network topology changes with respect
to the omnidirectional case.
In summary for Wimax technology, by the simple user-
deployed approach for the subnetwork 1, the (upper bound)
allocated end-to-end downlink transmission rate is up to
6.22Mbps per node (telecenter) and for the uplink is up to
622.4kbps per node in comparison to Wi-Fi networks that
provides 5.167 Mbps (downlink) and 516.7 kbps (uplink),
respectively and they have studied in [1].
C. Capacity evaluation for subnetwork 2
Again, for the gateway at San Juan del Rio Coco we assume
63m tower height and all nodes in the network are assumed to
5
be installed utilizing 20m antenna height.
When utilizing omnidirectional antennas with the selected
points there is not fully connectivity for all nodes that
composes the network. The utilization of beam-steering
antennas with an IM of 2dB make possible to connect all the
communities to the Internet gateway. The increment on the
interference margin is done in order to allowed more resistance
to interference and by this way we remove links with low
transmission rate (we avoid them to be used for routing traffic
and to be scheduled). We apply the described method before
together with the above user-deployed network and also
utilizing beam-steering antenna systems. The capacity
evaluations are summarized in Table IV.
TABLE IV
CAPACITY EVALUATION FOR SUBNETWORK 2 (**)
Antenna
System
IM [dB] Antenna
Gain [dBi]
Uplink
(rate/node)
Downlink
(rate/node)
Total
rate
Omni 2 16 -
- -
Beam-
steering
(HPBW=3
0)
2 23 488.5kbps 4.9Mbps 32.4
Mbps
Beam-
steering
(HPBW=3
0)
5 23
- - -
** Communities: El Ojoche, San Marcanda, El Varrillal, San Miguel, Cristo
Real, El Jobo, San Juan del Rio Coco (gateway).
Hence, for this user-deployed subnetwork using Beam-
steering antennae, the resulting (upper bound) end-to-end
downlink transmission rate is up to about 4.9Mbps per node
(community) and 488.5kbps per node for the uplink in
comparison to Wi-Fi, that provides 3.9 Mbps (downlink) and
388.7 kbps (uplink) respectively (already studied in [1]).
IV. CONCLUDING REMARKS
In this work we have revisited a methodology for capacity
evaluation of user-deployed multihoping wireless network
(WMNs) based on Wimax technology.
The evaluation results shown by an example of planning and
capacity evaluation in rural communities of Nicaragua
demonstrate that mesh networking is an appealing technology
to allow the communities themselves or even new potential
players to take an active part in the solution to their own needs.
This work also shows the need to develop easy-to-use free
software tools coupled with mesh network products to make
the community deployment of mesh networks ubiquitous.
In this work we have extended the methodology proposed in
[1] to include Wimax physical layer for community-deployed
MWNs in rural areas with low density users, which allow the
perform analysis and design of these kinds of networks.
MWNs are an important alternative for fixed wireless
broadband access to cover remotely located places in rough
terrain. However, we have to be aware that in 2.4 GHz
frequency bands for Wimax we can find, among others, further
interference from Wi-Fi systems already operational.
To study the systems we have considered three possibilities:
a) omnidirectional antennas with gain of 16 dBi, b) beam-
steering antenna systems with HPBW of 30 and antenna gain
of 23 dBi with IM=2 dB and c) beam steering with HPBW of
30 with antenna gain of 23 dBi with IM =5.
The results obtained in our subnetworks show a substantial
gain in capacity utilizing Wimax technology in comparison to
Wi-Fi networks (IEEE 802.11g), even though we are using
roughly similar bandwidths (20 MHz versus 22 MHz). Also,
WiMAX provides additional range than Wi-Fi.
Finally, even though WiMAX is economically feasible
option for rural communications, it is still potentially more
expensive than Wi-Fi networks.
REFERENCES
[1] M. Snchez G., O. Somarriba J., and J. Zander, "User-deployed and
capacity evaluation of multihop wireless networks: A Case Study for
Nicaragua," In Proc. 2008 8
th
Scandinavian Workshop on Wireless Ad-
hoc and Sensor Networks (ADHOC08), Stockholm, Sweden.
[2] Fondo de Inversin de Telecomunicaciones (FITEL). [Online].
Available: http://www.telcor.gob.ni/Desplegar.asp?PAG_ID=15
[3] R. Couds. (2012). Radio Mobile Freeware by VE2DBE. [Online].
Available: R. Couds. (2012). Radio Mobile Freeware by VE2DBE.
[Online]. Available: http://www.cplus.org/rmw/english1.html
[4] C. Thomas. (2011). Simulation of WiMAX Networks and Allocation.
[Online]. Available: http://cse.wustl.edu/Research/Lists/ Technical%20
Reports/Attachments/954/NS3%20Simulation%20of%20WiMAX%20
Networks.pdf
[5] J. Ishmael, S. Bury, D. Pezaros, and N. Race, "Deploying Rural
Community Wireless Mesh Networks," IEEE Internet Computing, vol.
12 no 4 pp. 22-229. 2008.
[6] Wireless Options for Providing Internet Services to Rural America.
(2008). [Online]. Available: http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse574-
08/ftp/rural/index.html
[7] M. Marques, J. Ambrosio, C. Reis, J. Riscado, D. Robalo, F. J. Velez,
and R. Costa, "Design and Planning of IEEE 802.16 Networks," In
Proc. 2007 of the 18
th
IEEE International Symposium on Personal,
Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC07).
[8] M. Johansson and L. Xiao, "Cross-Layer optimization of Wireless
Networks Using Nonlinear Column Generation," IEEE Trans. Wireless
Commun., vol. 5, no. 2 pp. 435-444, Feb 2006.
[9] M. Snchez G., J. Zander, and B. Hagerman, "On the performance of
power and rate control in STDMA multihop networks with advanced
antennas," in Proc. 2008 IEEE International Conference on
Networking, Cancun, Mexico.
BIOGRAPHYH
Oscar Somarriba Jarqun, received his title of
Electronic engineer from the National University of
Engineering (UNI), Managua, Nicaragua, in 1989,
and the Technical Licentiate of Engineering degree
in wireless digital systems from the Royal Institute
of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm, Sweden, in
1996. He also founded and headed the
Telecommunications department at UNI from
1989-1992. His employment experience included
the position as chief of staff and maintenance supervisor of the INTELSAT
earths station in Managua, RF Design & Optimization Manager of cellular
and PCS networks (Claro Nicaragua), consultant work and training courses
for several national and international agencies, among them: The National
Telecomm Company (ENITEL), The National Power Utility (ENEL), The
Nicaraguan Geophysical Institute (INETER), COCESNA, BELLSOUTH,
LIO/UN, UNDP/UN, and the World Bank.
His research focuses on complex problems in cross-layer optimization and
scheduling in wireless networks. He has published several papers on multihop
ad hoc networks for rural-area networks and emergency communications.
Currently, he is a senior Researcher with the Master's Programme in ICT at
UNI.