an intelligent routing protocol for vehicle safety communication in highway environments

8/8/2019 An Intelligent Routing Protocol for Vehicle safety communication in Highway Environments

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/an-intelligent-routing-protocol-for-vehicle-safety-communication-in-highway 1/8

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 2, ISSUE 11, NOVEMBER 2010, ISSN 2151-9617

HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/

WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 65

An Intelligent Routing Protocol for Vehicle

safety communication in Highway

EnvironmentsB. Ramakrishnan, Dr. R. S. Rajesh, R. S. Shaji

ABSTRACT - For rapidly changing topology and high speed mobility of the vehicles, Vehicular Adhoc Network emerges as a standard

routing protocol. An efficient Adhoc routing protocol plays a very important role in VANET application to ensure the safety of drivers and

passengers. In the earlier model routing protocols are applied to the802.11 technology based environment in which the vehicles are

moving inside the city limit and the data communication is between vehicle to vehicle via. Road Side Unit. In this paper a new VANET

model is designed for the vehicles moving outside the city without enough Road Side Units. Here the communication is purely based on

vehicle to vehicle and not from vehicle to Road Side Unit. The standard VANET routing protocols are applied to the above mentioned

VANET model and their characteristics are compared with the use of NS 2.34 version simulator and their results are presented. To

increase the performance of routing protocol, a cluster method and VANET based IEEE 802.11P technology are included in this model.

This simulation result shows the performance of reactive routing protocol and proactive routing protocol.

Index Terms – ITS, GPS, OBU, SHWM, DSDV,AODV,DSR.

—————————— ——————————

1. INTRODUCTION

HE Intelligent Transport System (ITS) has been

developed by using Vehicular Ad-hoc Network to

improve the safety of the passengers and drivers. It

provides the Emergency and Entertainment information to the

vehicles which enables a new mobile application for the

benefit of the travelers [1]. The inter-vehicular communication

field includes: vehicle to vehicle communication and vehicle to

Road Side Unit communication. Each VANET nodes includes

a Global Positioning System (GPS) device, which is used to

find the position of each vehicle in the vehicular network [2].

This information of the GPS is used by the VANET to identify

the position of other vehicles and exchanges information

which decreases the road accidents in the highways [2] [3].

This Vehicular Ad-hoc Network Communication requires a

new type of routing protocols for efficient data transmission1.

This paper compares the main routing protocols and

analyzes how these protocols behave in the given highway

scenario with varying traffic density and speed of the vehicles.

F.A. Associate Professor,Department of Computer Science, S.T Hindu College,Nagercoil-02.

S.B. Associate Professor,Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli-12.

T.C. Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Applications,St.Xaviers catholic College of Engineering, Nagercoil.

2. BACKGROUND OF VANET ENVIRONMENT

In the earlier research works, the area of vehicle to vehic

communication begins from the Adhoc network mode th

further expands in to VANET in which the vehicles ar

assumed to be moving in the city limit only [4]. The presen

work considers the vehicles moving outside the city an

exchanging information directly without using Road Sid

Unit. The range of 802.11 standards is nearly hundred meter

and the vehicles within this range behave as a router

propagate the information in a multi-hop communication [5

To transfer the message from one vehicle to another vehicl

the network needs an efficient protocol. The main function o

the routing protocol is to identify the position of each vehic

in a VANET. This information is used for identifying th

source and destination vehicles in a vehicular network. Th

routing protocol can be classified according to the range o

communication. By the use of routing algorithm, a route

established to link source and destination vehicles. The unica

protocol sends the information from one source vehicle

destination vehicle, but in multicast protocols the informatio

is sent to a group of vehicles [6]. For reliable vehicula

communication, the performance of the routing protocol use

to communicate the message is important [3]. Differen

routing protocols are suited for different VANE

characteristics and scenarios, but the main issue is how

select an efficient routing protocol among them. For th

purpose reactive and proactive protocols are taken in

T






consideration and these protocols are applied to the proposed

highway model scenario mentioned in this paper. The

characteristics of these protocols are studied using of NS 2.34

version network simulator.

3. ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN VANETS

A routing protocol plays an essential role in vehicular network

data communication. The VANET is a main component of

MANET, so the operations of these two Adhoc networks are

the same. Therefore most of the MANET routing protocols are

applicable to vehicular networks. Due to the difference in high

speed mobility of vehicles, VANET communication requires

suitable modification in the predefined routing protocols and

IEEE standards 802.11. This paper discusses the routing

protocols for VANET implemented in NS2.34 version namely

Destination Sequence Distance Vector (DSDV) protocol. It is a

table driven protocol, while the other two, namely Dynamic

Source Routing (DSR) and Ad-hoc On-demand Distance

Vector (AODV) routings are on demand protocols [7][8].

DSDV is a modification of the Bellman-ford algorithm, which

can solve routing problem in VANET environment. Each node

maintains a routing table, which contains the shortest path

information to other node in the vehicular network. The

DSDV algorithm provides one route to the destination vehicle

and chooses the shortest path according to the number of hops

to reach the destination. The DSDV is well suitable for small

scale ad-hoc network [6].

The DSR and AODV are on-demand Reactive routing, inwhich network routes are only updated when a source vehicle

wants to send a message to the destination vehicle [9]. The

DSR uses source routing in which the data packet contains the

header field that includes the information about the hop-by-

hop route to the destination. It also maintains multiple routes

for each destination. The routing discovery in DSR sets up a

route from the source vehicle to the destination vehicle by

sending the Route request packet from the source vehicle. If

any one of the vehicles breaks its wireless communication then

this algorithm reconnects the route from the source to the

destination vehicle by sending Route Error Packet to the

adjacent node of the broken link. The DSR algorithm does not

locally repair a broken wireless communication link. But it is

done through Error Rectification procedure and it consumes

much more time. Thus the connection setup time is higher

than that of DSDV protocol. AODV is similar to DSR, in which

a route setup from source to destination is done by sending a

Route request message. AODV uses a destination sequence

number to find the latest route to the destination vehicle [8].

4. RELATED WORK

Most of the previous works on routing protocols have been

established for Mobile Ad-hoc Networks [8] [9] only a limited

work has been done on vehicle to vehicle communication

inside the city. But no major attempt has been made on

vehicular communication outside the city area.

Algorithm1: Cluster Creation

Algorithm 2 : Service Discovery Algorithm

This paper makes an honest attempt to present a new simple

highway model with a novel Cluster concept for improving

the performance of the data communication [10]. Only a bird’s

eye view of the Cluster creation, Cluster Head Election and






Cluster Head Switching procedure for this highway model is

given in the present paper because these concepts were dealt

elaborately by the author in paper [11]. The service discovery

for the Cluster based highway model is presented in paper

[12]. The results of the comparative study of the standard

802.11 and 802.11P are presented in paper [13]. The paper [14]

presents the relative performance of the Cluster concept. Thedifferent routing protocols are analyzed with the information

obtained from the above four studies and their characteristics

are presented. The Algorithm 1 and Algorithm 2 describes the

cluster creation method and service discovery procedure for

the Simple Highway model [15].

5. SYSTEM MODEL

Instead of the random movement of nodes in MANETs, the

nodes in VANET move in predefined road. The radio range of

VANET is in between 250 and 350 meters. Within this range

the vehicles can easily communicate with each other. The

mobility of the vehicular node is dependent on parameters

like speed, direction of the vehicles and the layout of roads. It

is a fact that the speed of the moving vehicle on a highway is

higher i.e. nearly 150 km/hr. Therefore the topology in

VANET changes more frequently. For this reason the IEEE

standard 802.11 is not well suited for vehicular environment.

So the amendment made on 802.11 establishes a new standard

for VANET model. It is known as the wireless access in

vehicular environment (WAVE) . Another version of 802.11 is

known as 802.11p [13]. The Figure 1 represents the VANET

system architecture for Emergency situation.

Figure 1 : Emergency Broadcasting VANET Architecture

6. PROPOSED MODEL

The high speed vehicles moving in a highway are equippe

with a communication device known as On-Board Un

(OBU). By using such devices, vehicle can communicate wit

each other as well as with Road Side Unit (RSU). As there

enough member of RSU in the city limit, the moving vehicle

get good data communication among them. But when the

move outside the city limit the communication is weak due lack of RSU’s. In the present work each vehicle acts as a rout

to communicate with other vehicles. The routing protoco

assume that each vehicle in the VANET knows its positio

Therefore each vehicle is equipped with a Global Positionin

System (GPS) device to identify the correct location of th

destination node. Moreover it is assumed that each vehicle h

an on-board navigation system and the preloaded digit

maps through which it can determine the position of i

neighboring junction. It is also assumed that each vehicle h

the knowledge about its velocity and direction of movemen

of the vehicle.

The reliability of the Routing protocols is analyzed only o

the basis of the above mentioned assumptions. It is observe

that in the existing research work the IEEE standard used fo

data communication is 802.11. But due to the high spee

vehicle movements the standard 802.11p is included in th

model [13]. To increase the efficiency of the VANE

communication, a clustering concept is introduced in th

highway model. This new cluster algorithm splits th

vehicular area into a number of clusters and each cluster has

cluster head. Generally the cluster head may be RSU’s in ci

environment but in the highways anyone of the vehicle wigood data driven capability acts as a Cluster head [11]. All th

Cluster heads are synchronized in a specific period of tim

and it is ensured that all the cluster heads have the late

service updates. If the vehicle crosses the Cluster boundar

then the Cluster head algorithm selects a prominent vehicle a

a new cluster head and the information of the old Cluster hea

is transferred to the current one.

Whenever a new service is included, then all the Clust

heads immediately update their database with the ne

information [11]. If a node wants to search a service,

immediately contacts its local Cluster head. If the specifie

service is available then it provides details to the requeste

node. If not, the discovery algorithm synchronizes all th

Cluster heads and makes a search for the requested servi

[14].

7. SIMULATION

The simulation model is based on NS 2 simulation versio

2.34. This simulation results are displayed in the NAM file an






the routing parameters are obtained from the trace file. To

evaluate the performance of the routing protocols, some

parameters have been used in the TCL file for measuring the

efficiency of vehicle to vehicle communication. The study of

these parameters is analyzed by the NS 2 Trace file. Therefore

the Agent Trace ON and Route Trace ON in the TCL fie are

activated.

8. EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS

The simulation scenario is designed according to the normal

movement of the vehicles in highways. Let us assume the

VANET area as 1400*1400 meters in highway with

bidirectional movement of vehicles. The number of vehicles in

this simulation is varying from 25 to 150. This proposed work

defines a scenario for each set of nodes. The NS2.34 highway

scenario is shown in Table 1 and the critical simulation

parameters are shown in Table 2 and Table 3.

Table1: Simple Highway Mobility Model -NS2.34 NAM file output

Table 2: IEEE 802.11p Parameters in TCL file

In the first case, a simulation is done with 25 nodes where

the communication takes place between the source vehicle 5

and the destination vehicle 20. This study has been repeated

with the number of Clusters varying from 2 to 20 with

multiples of two. Then the speed of the vehicle is assumed to

be constant in each scenario and the communication has been

tested by using the speed of the vehicle between 5 and25m/sec.

Table3 : Critical parameters used in NS 2.34 VANET simulations

9. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

9.1 Analysis of Packet receiving time for various

protocols using 802.11 & 802.11p

This parameter defines the time it needs to establish the

connection for each protocol. The Packet has been transmitted

from the source vehicle 5 to the destination vehicle 20. This

scenario contains 100 nodes with the number of Clusters

varying from 2 to 20 in steps of two. The speed of each vehicle

is assumed to be 10 m/sec and the IEEE standard 802.11 is

used for this stimulation. The performance of Packe

Receiving Time for routing protocol DSDV, AODV and DSR is

shown in figure 2.






Figure 2 Number of cluster vs Packet receiving time (msec) using IEEE

802.11


802.11p


802.11p &802.11

It’s noticed that the DSDV protocol yields a low Packet

Receiving Time than AODV and DSR. The same result is

obtained when the VANET IEEE standard 802.11P is included

in this network model which is shown in Figure 3. From

Figure 4 it is observed that the routing protocol DSDV wi

802.11P yields a low Packet Receiving Time than the routin

protocol DSDV with standard 802.11.

9.2 Comparison of broadcasting time for different

routing protocols using802.11&802.11p

The broadcasting time for various protocols in the propose

simple highway model with 100 nodes is presented in figure

It is observed that, the presence of DSDV protocol wit

standard 802.11 is better than AODV and DSR. The DS

protocol has high broadcasting time which is shown in figu

4 and the simulation result is found in the broadcasting tim

for various protocols using 802.11P. From the Table 4 an

Figure 5 and Figure 6, it is clear that DSDV yields low

broadcasting time than the other two. It is also noted that th

DSR has high value than AODV protocol.

Figure 5 Number of cluster vs Broad casting time (msec) using IEEE

802.11

Figure 6 Number of cluster vs Broad casting time (msec) using IEEE

802.11p






Table 4. cluster vs Broad casting time (msec) using IEEE 802.11

&802.11p

9.3 Analytical study of packet delay time for different

routing protocols using 802.11p

It indicates the propagation and transfer delay between first

packet and second packet. The Packet delay times for various

routing protocols are measured and the comparative delay

time

Figure 7. cluster vs Packer delay time (msec)using 802.11p

Characteristic of standard 802.11 with speed 10 is noticed in

Figure 7. With Cluster 4 and 8, the delay time of the packet for

AODV is lower than other two protocols.

9.4 Performance analysis of normalized routing load

for various Routing protocols

Figure 8 cluster vs Normalized routing load using IEEE 802.11p

The Figure 8 shows the analysis of normalized routing load

for various routing protocol with speed 10. A low normalized

load is observed when DSR protocol is used and better resultis achieved for Clusters between 4 and 10.

9.5 Packet forward ratio for DSDV, DSR AND AODV

protocols

Figure 9. Cluster vs Packet forward ratio using IEEE 802.11p

In Figure 9 it is observed that the Packet forward ratio is

higher for AODV protocol and its performance is good if the






number of Cluster is below 8. When the number of Clusters

increases, the packet forward ratio decreases in the AODV

where as it increases in DSR protocol.

9.6 Packets delivery ratio and throughput analysis for

reactive and proactive protocols

From Figure 10, it is observed that the packet delivery ratio is

high for DSR protocol and low performance is received in

AODV protocol. Figure 11 shows the throughput comparison

of AODV, DSR and DSDV. The graph reveals that DSDV has

higher throughput than AODV and DSR. The packet through

put in a given highway scenario is low for DSR protocol.

Figure 10 Cluster vs Packet Delivery ratio using IEEE 802.11p

Figure 11 Cluster vs Throughput using IEEE 802.11p

10. CONCLUSION

This paper analyzes the routing protocols Destination

Sequence Distance Vector (DSDV), Ah-hoc On-demand

Distance Vector and Dynamic Source Routing in a VANET

environment. It has been proved that a better performance is

received in DSDV for both 802.11 and 802.11p standards in

terms of the packet receiving time and Broadcasting time.

Normally DSDV protocol is well suited for small scale ad-ho

network [7]. Among three routing protocols the DSDV has th

best packet receiving time and Broad casting time. It is als

noted that the proactive routing protocol DSDV achieve

better through put than the reactive protocols AODV an

DSR. From this analytical work it has been proved that, whe

dealing with Packet delay time, Packet delivery ratio, Packforward ratio and Normalized routing load the protocols th

present better response are AODV and DSR. Future researc

can be done in this area to create a geographical routin

procedure for VANET networks in order to increase the

performance.

REFERENCES

[1] Shi, W. Liu Y “Real-Time urban traffic monitoring with glob

positioning System equipped vehicles” Intelligent Transport System, IE

Issue Date: June 2010, Volume 4 Issue 2 Page :113-120.

[2] Ferreiro-Lage, J.A. Gestoso, C.P. Rubinos, O. Agelet, F.A.”Analysis Unicast Routing Protocols for VANETs”Networking and Services, 200

International Conference on April 2009 On page(s): 518 – 521.

[3] Niansheng Liu Huihuan Qian Jingyu Yan Yangsheng X

“Performance analysis of routing protocols for vehicle safe

communications on the freeway” Anti-counterfeiting, Security, an

Identification in Communication, 2009. On page(s): 85 – 88.

[4] Berijesh Kadri Mohandas, Amiya Nayak, Kshirasagar Naik, Nishi

Goel “ABSRP: A Service Discovery Approach for Vehicular Ad-H

Networks” page 1590-1594 IEEE Asia Pacific Service Computin

Conference 2008.

[5] Yi Qian Kejie Lu Moayeri, N “A Secure VANET MAC Protocol f

DSRC Applications”, This paper appears in: Global Telecommunicatio

Conference, 2008. IEEE GLOBECOM 2008. On page(s): 1 – 5.

[6] Ali, S. Bilal, S.M. “An Intelligent Routing protocol for VANETs

city environments”, Computer, Control and Communication, 2n

International Conference on 2009 On page(s): 1 – 5

[7] Zuo, Jing Wang, Yuhao Liu, Yuan Zhang, Yan,” Performan

Evaluation of Routing Protocol in VANET with Vehicle-Node Density

(WiCOM), 2010 ,onOn page(s): 1 – 4.

[8] Tuteja, Asma Gujral, Rajneesh Thalia, Sunil,” Comparative

Performance Analysis of DSDV, AODV and DSR Routing Protocols in

MANET Using NS2”, ACE, International Conference on 2010,On

page(s): 330 – 333.

[9] S.J. Lee, M.Gerla and C.K.Toh, “ A Simulation Study of Table Driv

and n-Demand Routing Protocols for Mobile Ad-hoc Networks”, IEE

network,1999 page:48-54.

[10] TaeOh Kim, SungDae jung, SangSun Lee Korea “Clustering-Bas

Multi-Channel MAC Protocol In VANET” Ubiquitous Communicatio

Page 380-383, Dec 2009.

[11] B.Ramakrishnan,R.S.Rajesh,R.S.Shaji,” CBVANET: A Cluster Bas

Vehicular Adhoc Network Model for Simple Highway Communication

Int.J.Advanced Networking and Application Dec-2010 ,Under review.






[12] B.Ramakrishnan,R.S.Rajesh,R.S.Shaji,” SD CBVANET: Service

Discovery in Cluster based Vehicular Adhoc Network model for Simple

HighWay Communication”,ICTACT,Dec-2010, Paper Under review.

[13] B.Ramakrishnan,R.S.Rajesh,R.S.Shaji,” Performance Analysis of

802.11 and 802.11p in Cluster Based Simple Highway Model”, IJCSIT,

Paper accepted for publication.

[14] B.Ramakrishnan,R.S.Rajesh,R.S.Shaji,” Analytical study of Clusterand Sans Cluster Vehicular Adhoc Network Communication”, INT

Journal on Computer Engg & Info Tech, Dec-2010, Paper under review.

[15] Abrougui, K. Pazzi, R.W.N. Boukerche, A. PARADISE Res. Lab., SITE

Univ. of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada “Performance Evaluation of

Location-Based Service Discovery Protocols for Vehicular Networks” IEEE

conference May2010, Page 1-5.

an intelligent routing protocol for vehicle safety communication in highway environments

Documents