## 4 Results
It is known that \(n\) is the sum of WiFi and cellular links and can be confirmed in the corresponding scenarios using Tables 3 and 4. The purpose of these tables is to quantify the necessary resources and review the behavior of the network in its different scenarios by analyzing the number of WiFi links and cellular links required, coverage rates, average maximum distances of intra-cluster and inter-cluster links, average time that a UDAP takes to add the information and the computation of FSPL considering different frequencies applicable to a wireless WiFi and cellular network. Each of these results allows us to plan the deployment of the network by observing their behavior. Considering that by the proposed heuristic, the minimum values on FSPL, end to end delay and transmission distances are obtained, this provides a near-optimal solution to the planning problem exposed in this research. As the frequency of the wireless WiFi and cellular network signal increases, also the FSPL metrics increase. In general terms, the lower the frequency of transmission, the better will be the signal that \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Scenario** & **Cellular** & **Coverage** & **Distance (m)** & **Rand Trip Time (ms)** & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Parameters FSPL (dB)**} \\ \cline{2-10} \# & **\# Links** & **\%** & **Average** & **3 G** & **4 G** & **5 G** & **850 MHz** & **1700 MHz** & **1900 MHz** \\ \hline
1 & 18 & 100 & 84.23 & 70 & 20 & 5 & 69.55 & 75.57 & 76.53 \\
2 & 11 & 100 & 59.46 & 70 & 20 & 5 & 66.52 & 72.54 & 73.51 \\
3 & 4 & 100 & 55.03 & 70 & 20 & 5 & 65.85 & 71.87 & 72.84 \\
4 & 2 & 100 & 68.41 & 70 & 20 & 5 & 67.74 & 73.76 & 74.73 \\
5 & 1 & 100 & 66.76 & 70 & 20 & 5 & 67.53 & 73.55 & 74.52 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Wireless cellular network. Source: the authors. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Scenario** & **WiFi** & **Coverage** & **Distance (m)** & **Delay Cluster (ms)** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Parameters FSPL (dB)**} \\ \cline{2-7} \# & **\# of Links** & **\%** & **Average** & **Average** & **2.4 GHz** & **5.4 GHz** & **5.8 GHz** \\ \hline
1 & 494 & 100 & 30.12 & 228.26 & 69.63 & 76.68 & 77.30 \\
2 & 245 & 100 & 30.27 & 192.85 & 69.67 & 76.82 & 77.84 \\
3 & 124 & 100 & 33.44 & 267.65 & 70.54 & 77.60 & 78.20 \\
4 & 62 & 100 & 31.98 & 258.29 & 70.15 & 77.20 & 77.82 \\
5 & 31 & 100 & 25.52 & 236.95 & 68.19 & 75.24 & 75.86 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Wireless WiFi network: \(L=800\)-bit/packet, Lambda = 0.1 package/s. Source: the authors. will travel through the air and the objects. FSPL is used to predict the intensity of the required signals in a wireless system. In addition, in Tables 3 and 4, if we add the delays that it takes a UDAP to collect the information of the cluster and the delay in a cellular technology, we can estimate the average total time in which the BSs have the data of each UDAP deployed in the scenario merged available. The data of Round Trip Time (RTT) of Table 4 are taken from [82], which are applied in cellular technology. If we compare Tables 3 and 4, we can see that the metrics of delays in WiFi are much greater than the metrics of cellular delays. However, the amount does not exceed the allowed delays in AMI exposed in the literature for efficient data aggregation. Therefore, with Tables 3 and 4, viewing each scenario, we can obtain the required procedures for the deployment of SMs under the configuration of a hybrid wireless network (WiFi-cellular). Another fact of much interest is the length of optical fiber between the BSs and the central office. In this case study, the length is 280 m in all scenarios, since the latitude and longitude coordinates of the BSs and central office are fixed.