# Usage of IoT Framework in Water Supply Management for Smart City in Nepal
## 2 Related Works
ATmega was chosen for the nodes to satisfy the low power system for remote area purpose, while the choice of Raspberry Pi as the controller for the  
Figure 2: Topology of water level monitoring system. hub was based on the system on chip and complete embedded system that has SPI to communicate with HopeRF RFM95 [34]. The experiments carried out in a research entitled \"Smart Water Management Platform: IoT-Based Precision Irrigation for Agriculture\" involved abundant sensors, sending data every 10 min. The scenarios were executed with four different workloads determined by the number of sensors sending messages simultaneously. Each experiment took 1 min and was replicated 30 times, totalizing 16 h of running experiments. Asymptotic confidence intervals were calculated with a 99% confidence level. This configuration captured the response of a connection from the farm to the cloud using 4G connection, with 10 Mbps speed and a delay of 45 ms with a jitter of 5 ms. The result of the experiments concluded that while using MongoDB the utilization of the central processing unit (CPU) increased with the increasing numbers of sensors and the usage of RAM increased while using the IoT agent [35]. For implementing the smart water system using IoT, the sensors are placed in the center of the inner side of the tank cover and these sensors continuously provide information on the real-time status of water. This information is updated on the cloud and some cell phone applications can also be used to visualize the level of the water in the tank. The automatic functioning of the motor controls the amount of water in the tank [36]. The development of the IoT framework requires an experiment, a review of literature, a survey, and analysis. After performing all these activities, we need to verify and validate the developed framework using scientific methods. In this paper the type of experiment and survey we performed has been summarized and presented as a result of the survey and, through rigorous analysis, a framework has been recommended. Several research works have been undertaken before and the comparison of the research done previously is depicted in Table 2. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**SN** & **IoT Framework** & & **Features** & **Limitations** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{1} & & i. & Security, identity, and data permissions should & \\  & & & be given the highest priority & \\  & & ii. & Stimulate innovation & \\  & & iii. & Reduce product development life cycle & \\  & & iv. & Offers Business intelligence, Information & \\  & & & security, user interface / user experience & \\  & & & (UI/UX) design, Mobile integration, & \\  & & & embedded systems with Networking & \\  & & & and communication. & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{2} & & & i. & Scalability of connected devices & The macro-level framework \\  & & ii. & Effective monitoring of the system & can be challenging for the one \\  & & iii. & Information exchange between linked devices & who wants to bring IoT \\  & & & & framework into action \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{3} & & i. & Powerful, automated, and high security & The complexity associated \\  & & & in connectivity & with the IoT framework and \\  & & ii. & Uses Cisco Kinetic IoT platform to extract, & more concentration against \\  & & & move and compute the data & threats with a secure \\  & & & & IoT architecture \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{4} & & & i. & Server-oriented platform based on REST & \\  & & & and NodeJS & \\  & & ii. & Reactive programming philosophy adopted & \\  & & iii. & Geo-distributed network & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{5} & & & Entertains proactive and personalized activities from & More administrative tasks are \\  & & & any device to bring clients closer & focused on. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Comparison of different IoT frameworks.