A Multiband MAC Protocol for Impulse-based UWB Ad Hoc Networks Ioannis Broustis, Srikanth V....
-
Upload
terence-jefferson -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of A Multiband MAC Protocol for Impulse-based UWB Ad Hoc Networks Ioannis Broustis, Srikanth V....
A Multiband MAC Protocol for Impulse-based UWB Ad Hoc Networks
Ioannis Broustis, Srikanth V. Krishnamurthy, Michalis Faloutsos,
Mart Molle and Jeffrey R. Foerster
{broustis, krish, michalis, mart} @ cs.ucr.edu
jeffrey.r.foerster @ intel.com
Ioannis Broustis, Srikanth V. Krishnamurthy, Michalis Faloutsos,
Mart Molle and Jeffrey R. Foerster
{broustis, krish, michalis, mart} @ cs.ucr.edu
jeffrey.r.foerster @ intel.com
2
The context
• Wireless needs• High Speed networking• Low cost, low power transport
• Home, enterprise environments
• Current wireless solutions• Low data rates, high power consumption
• UWB pros• High data rates• Low-power operation and low
cost• Low probability of detection• Low interference levels
Picture from http://kom.aau.dk/group/03gr1096/thesis.pdf
3
Motivation & contribution
• A lot of work has been done in the PHY layer of UWB
• Only a few MAC proposals for UWB• Most of them for master-slave deployments• Many assumptions - some of them cannot be implemented in the real
world• Some do not take into account the PHY characteristics
• We design and evaluate a novel multiband MAC protocol for UWB ad hoc networks• Utilizes efficiently the available bandwidth• Achieves much better performance than other MAC protocols for Ad
Hoc UWB• Conforms with FCC regulations
4
Roadmap
UWB Overview The problem Our MAC protocol
Simulation ResultsConclusions
5
UWB definitions
• Any signal that occupies: • At least 500 MHz of bandwidth, or• More than 25% of a fractional bandwidth:
• Available bandwidth: 7500 MHz • FCC has allocated the band from 3.1 GHz to 10.6 GHz for UWB
communications• Emission levels must fall under max limits (average -41.25 dBm/MHz)• Traditionally: pulse transmissions• Range: 0 to 15m
CLH
LH
f
BW
ff
ff=
+−
=)(2η
UWB Spectrum (7.5 GHz)
3.1 10.65.725 - 5.825
802.11a (0.1 GHz)
Frequency (GHz)
EIR
P
FCC limit:- 41.25 dBm/MHz
PSD
6
Bandwidth utilization
• Single-Band Implementation• One transmission occupies the whole BW at a time
• Multi-Band Implementation• The 7.5 GHz are divided into multiple bands• FCC regulations must be obeyed
• Benefits from multiband approach • Low interference from/to systems that share a portion of the BW• Parallel data transmissions in the different bands• Similar H/W cost with single-band implementations
3.1 10.6
802.11a (5.725-5.825 GHz)
EIR
P
7
• Time Hopping, as per Time Hopping Sequences (THS)• Binary Pulse Position Modulation• Many pulses per bit, to increase reliability
• THS overlap Pulse collisions
• Tx, Rx based THS• PAM also possible
Impulse-based UWB
Tf
Tc
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
THS1: 0, 3, 2, 6
THS2: 4, 6, 3, 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
time
Tc frame
0 1
8
Roadmap
UWB Overview The problem Our MAC protocol
Simulation ResultsConclusions
9
What is the problem?
• UWB pulses are subject to Multipath Delay Spread• Multiple time-shifted pulse copies appear at the receiver
• Intersymbol Interference (ISI)• Tens of nanoseconds (~ 25 to 30nsec for indoor environments)• Collisions at the receiver, with subsequent pulse transmissions
– From the same or different transmitter
A
B
Power Delay Profile
timeobstacle
obstacle
A
10
Potential solutions
• Equalizers, CDMA + Rake receiver• Add overhead and Hardware cost
• Pulse spacing at least equal to the delay spread duration• The adoption of a multi-band mechanism does not reduce the data
rate• A set of carriers modulate the pulse in each band and determine the
pulse shape
Single-band
Multi-band
time
Tc frame
Pulse width
Delay Spread
~0.3nsec
~3nsec (10 bands)
11
Roadmap
UWB Overview The problem Our MAC protocol
Simulation ResultsConclusions
12
MAC overview
• We divide the available BW into B bands• One band for requests and band information. The rest for data
transmissions and ACKs
• Map of Band availability• Superframes: Transmission of all control and data packets• Availability frames: Declare intention to keep using a band
time
frequency
Control (REQ)
Data 1
Data 2
Data 3
Data 4
Data B-1
Superframe SuperframeAvailability framek1 k
3
kB-1…..k2
..…
..
..…
..
13
• Bandwidth: each of our bands is 500 MHz wide• Emission limits : -41.25 dBm/MHz
• For the received SNR we have:
• Attenuation for each band• PT: Transmitter PSD (-41.25 dBm/MHz) • N0: PSD of the thermal noise (-114 dBm/MHz)• d: Tx-Rx distance• SNRR = 3 dB• fc for the upper band
• For the last band: fc = 10.35 GHz distance ~ 7 meters• We set this distance as the maximum distance for all bands• We use lower transmission powers for the other (lower) bands• We conform with the average power and the pulse frequency is 1
MHz. We conform with the peak power constraint as well :)
Conformance with FCC regulations
contribution
dc
fNPSNR c
TR log204
log200 −⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎝
⎛−−=π
14
• Nodes that intend to keep occupying a data band, transmit a short beacon during the availability frame
• The rest of the nodes “listen” to the whole availability frame• Information about which bands will be occupied during the
upcoming superframe
MAC details: band selection
Availability frame SuperframeSuperframe
Data band k
slot kREQ band
15
MAC details: request (REQ) initiation
• The REQ packet is transmitted in the Req-band• It includes the selected band of the Tx• The receiver’s THS is used• Nodes are allowed to initiate a REQ transmission only at the beginning
of a superframe
Availability frame Superframe
REQ (Receiver’s THS) REQ band
Data band
Data band
FreeFreeFree
16
• 4 possible cases• 1. Everything goes fine
• The receiver decodes the request• Both nodes switch to the selected band• The receiver sends the RACK packet (consecutive pulses)• The Data and DACK packet transmissions follow
MAC details: REQ acknowledgment
Availability frame Superframe
REQ REQ band
Data band
Data band RACK DATA DACK
17
• 4 possible cases• 2. Two or more requests towards the same receiver collide
• The receiver cannot decode the request• The transmitters switch to their selected bands, waiting for the RACK• After a specific time interval they will assume that their request did not
reach the receiver• Backoff timers are initiated (decreased by one per superframe)• When backoff=0 the node retransmits the request
MAC details: REQ acknowledgment
REQ (same THS)
Superframe … … … Superframe
REQ (same THS)REQ band
Data band
Data band
Response not received
Availability
frame
REQ (same THS)
Back
-off
countd
ow
n
Availability frame
18
• 4 possible cases• 3. The intended receiver is currently busy
• The receiver will not hear the request• The transmitter however will switch to its selected band• The transmitter initiates a backoff timer and retransmits the request as
soon as this timer becomes zero
MAC details: REQ acknowledgment
Availability frame Superframe … … … Superframe
REQ towards node CREQ band
Data band
Data-band DATA chunk from C to D DACK
REQ
Back-off countdownResponse not received
19
MAC details: REQ acknowledgment
• 4 possible cases• 4. Two or more RACKs collide
• If two or more transmitters select the same band, a RACK collision is likely to occur in that data band
• Further actions are temporarily aborted, until the upcoming availability frame
• The requests are retransmitted after the end of the upcoming availability frame
• With our policy, Data packet collisions are avoided
Availability frame
REQ
Superframe
REQ REQ band
Data band
Data bandRACK
RACK
Abort
Tem
pora
rily
20
MAC details: DATA and DACK
• The RACK, DATA and DACK packets are transmitted with consecutive pulses
• After the end of the session, transmitter and receiver switch to the REQ band
• If they don’t have packets to send, they stay idle listening to their own THSs
Availability
frame
Superframe
REQ REQ band
Data band
Data band RACK DATA DACK
21
Roadmap
UWB Overview The problem Our MAC protocol
Simulation ResultsConclusions
22
Comparisons
• We compare our scheme with a single-band approach, in which:• THSs are used for all kinds of packets.• Each pair of nodes has a predetermined common - unique THS
Steps:
REQ
RACK
DATA
DACK
READY
A B
The Tx sends a request to the Rx as per the Rx’s THSBoth Tx and Rx switch to their common THS. The Rx sends a reply
back The Tx further transmits the data packetThe Rx sends an ACK as soon as it receives the data packet
Both Tx and Rx switch to their own THSs. They further transmit a short beacon to indicate their availability
23
Simulation set-up
• Simulator in C++ Nodes 6 to 30
Bands 15
Region 30x30 m2 square, multi-hop
Range 7 meters
Node degree 3, Brownian motion
Ratio Tf / Tc 6
Bit repetition 2, with 1/3 conv. encoder
Tc chip 60 nsec, (2 x delay spread)
Superframe 11200 chips
Availability frame 14 slots, 33 chips each
Light traffic CBR, arrival every 40 msec
Heavy traffic CBR, arrival every 1.4 msec
Poisson, (lambda = 5.028)
Data packet 250 bytes
Control packets 15 bytes
24
Simulations: pulse collisions
• Decreased by an order of magnitude• Data packets in our case are collision-free
25
• The bit error rate is decreased by more than 4 times in our case
• The bit error rate is decreased by more than 4 times in our case
Simulations: BER
26
• Time from: packet arrival in the queue until completion of its transmission • Decreased by a factor of 6 for low densities
• Time from: packet arrival in the queue until completion of its transmission • Decreased by a factor of 6 for low densities
Simulations: average packet delay
27
• Higher as much as 16.7% in our case• Light traffic beneficial for the single-band case• Would observe larger difference with heavier traffic
• Higher as much as 16.7% in our case• Light traffic beneficial for the single-band case• Would observe larger difference with heavier traffic
Simulations: average network throughput
28
• High CBR arrival rate• More than an order of magnitude better throughput in our case
• High CBR arrival rate• More than an order of magnitude better throughput in our case
Simulations: average throughput for high loads
29
Roadmap
UWB Overview The problem Our MAC protocol
Simulation ResultsConclusions
30
Conclusions
• We propose a novel multiband MAC protocol for UWB ad hoc networks• Better network performance than previous impulse-UWB MAC• No equalizer or CDMA required to address the delay spread
effects• Utilizes efficiently the 7.5 GHz bandwidth• Adopts all the advantages of a multiband UWB approach• Respects the FCC regulations
• Our ongoing work with UWB:• 1. New multiband MAC that employs binary conflict resolution
• Applicable for home, office and wearable ad hoc networks• Demonstrates much better performance in terms of throughput and
delay
31
Questions? (References available upon request)