Performance Evaluation of Different ToS Using Heterogeneous Communication Interfaces in FANETs

Laura Michaella B Ribeiro,Ivan Müller,Leandro Buss Becker

doi:10.3389/ffutr.2021.755998

Abstract

The use of different types-of-services (ToS), such as voice, data, and video, has become increasingly present in the execution of applications involving networks composed of multiple UAVs. These applications usually require the UAVs to share different ToS in a dynamic and ad-hoc manner, such that they can support the execution of cooperative/collaborative tasks. The use of heterogeneous communication has showed gains in maintaining the connection among highly mobile nodes, while increasing the reliable transmission of data, as is necessary in MANETS, VANETs and, more recently, FANETs. The aim of this paper is to present a performance evaluation of a heterogeneous interface manager (IM), which applies a heuristic to choose the best among several single- and multi-band wireless communication interfaces, including IEEE 802.11n, IEEE 802.11p, IEEE 802.11ac, and IEEE 802.11ax. Simulated scenarios with three, five, and eight UAV nodes are developed by integrating NS-3 and Gazebo simulation tools. The IM performance is analyzed by applying different numbers of interfaces and comparing with interfaces applied homogeneously by defining two set of results, in terms of application and MAC and PHY metrics, respectively. Finally, we also evaluate the associated performance, considering voice, data, and video streaming ToS. The results indicate that the combination of different interfaces has a very powerful effect on maintaining or increasing the communication intensity.

Highlights

Multi-UAV systems consist of applications that involve several UAVs operating in a collaborative manner, sharing tasks in order to achieve pre-defined goals during a mission
In this work, the MTxP was composed by the TxP multiplied by duration(s)/2. As it was defined in all scenarios, three ToS (AC_BE, AC_BK, and access classes of service: Voice (AC_VO)) were sent and validated by all nodes for up to half of the maximum duration plus 1 s; for example, in the three-node scenario, considering the maximum data rate adopted by network, Eq 1 results in: MTxP(network) [(50000000(bps)/((1500p8)p3)]p((132/2) + 1)
We presented an extensive analysis of different communication interface combinations applied within a heterogeneous interface manager

Summary

Introduction

Multi-UAV (or mUAV) systems consist of applications that involve several UAVs operating in a collaborative manner, sharing tasks in order to achieve pre-defined goals during a mission. A UAV in an SAR (Search and Rescue) mission could be used in different ways, such as for transmitting video of a drowning person to the Ground Control Station and other UAVs, while still sharing goals with others, such as delivering supplies to or carrying life buoys to the victims (Batista da Silva et al, 2017; Kim and Choi, 2017). These goals generate different network traffics, which vary in packet size, transmission rate, and bandwidth consumption

Objectives

Results

Conclusion