# Analysis and Experimental Validation of Efficient Coded OFDM for an Impulsive Noise Environment
## 5 Performance Analysis
### Network Performance Analysis
#### 5.2.1 Traffic Rate  
We compute the primary Input/Output (IO) graphics from Wireshark in different situations. The IO graphs identify the overall rate of traffic seen in the capture files. The X axis corresponds to the time in seconds, and the Y axis is the packets per second.  
Two examples of the results are depicted in Figure 6. The traffic for 12 kV in the first situation is plotted in Figure 5(a), while Figure 5(b) represents the traffic for 18 kV. The first remark is that we receive more packets in the LOS situation than NLOS for the two configurations. When we analyze the results in Figure 6, we can note that the voltage does not affect the traffic of the received packets considerably. However, we have a degradation of performance when we are in an NLOS situation. This means that the traffic of the LOS environment can be controlled and managed, whereas it is not possible for NLOS because of the events' randomness.  
In Table 5, we evaluate LOS and NLOS traffic averages for both configurations. From this table, we notice that the average \(\mu_{LOS1}\) is around 1.5 regardless of the voltage level, while in NLOS, the average \(\mu_{NLOS1}\) is approximately one. We derive \(\Delta\), which is the difference between the average in LOS and NLOS. This difference \(\Delta_{1}\) is equal to 0.5. However, for the second situation, we observe that the average traffic is roughly similar in LOS and NLOS, i.e., \(\mu_{LOS2}\approx\mu_{NLOS2}\). This is well proven by the difference \(\Delta_{2}\), which is approximately equal to 0.1.  
In order to analyze the traffic in depth, we now compute the PDR, which is the ratio between the received packets and the emitted ones. The following relation defines the PDR:  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Voltages**} \\ \hline
**Mean** & **12 kV** & **14 kV** & **16 kV** & **18 kV** \\ \hline \(\mu_{LOS1}\) & 1.5 & 1.42 & 1.31 & 1.48 \\ \(\mu_{NLOS1}\) & 1.05 & 0.9 & 0.98 & 0.95 \\ \(\Delta_{1}\) & 0.45 & 0.52 & 0.33 & 0.53 \\ \hline \(\mu_{LOS2}\) & 1.025 & 1.09 & 1.16 & 1.05 \\ \(\mu_{NLOS2}\) & 0.84 & 1.08 & 1.05 & 1.14 \\ \(\Delta_{2}\) & 0.18 & 0.01 & 0.11 & -0.09 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 5: Mean of the overall rate of traffic for all voltages in different configurations.  
Figure 6: Overall rate of traffic for 12 and 18 kV when the emitter and the receiver are both placed at 1 m from the source.  
\[PDR=\frac{\sum P_{r}}{\sum P_{e}} \tag{6}\]  
where \(P_{r}\) and \(P_{e}\) are the received and the emitted packets, respectively. The obtained results are summarized in Table 6.  
The information in Table 6 confirms the analysis made with the overall traffic rate. We can note that we received more packets for the LOS than the NLOS situation. Another remark is that we have approximately the same delivery ratio when considering the voltage. As can be seen, the \(PDR_{mean_{\text{LOS}}}\) is \(\approx\) 0.4, which means that 60% of packets are lost. However, for NLOS situation, 70% of packets are lost, which means that \(PDR_{mean_{\text{NLOS}}}\) is \(\approx\) 0.3. This was expected because when we use a transmission power of 12 dBm, it is demonstrated that with the SDR, the PDR is \(\approx\) 0.5 in normal conditions, i.e., with a low length of packets (95 bytes) and a BPSK modulated with a rate of 1/2. To improve the PDR, we should increase the transmission power.