# Arithmetic Optimization AOMDV Routing Protocol for FANETs
## 4 Performance Evaluation
### Simulation Results and Discussion
#### 4.3.1 Impact of UAV Node Velocity  
We investigated the impact of different node velocities in FANETs. The velocities of the UAV nodes varied between 10 m/s and 40 m/s, while the number of UAV nodes remained fixed at 100.  
Figure 3 illustrates the PDR of the compared routing protocols for varying UAV velocities. When the movement velocity is less than 15 m/s, the probability of link breakage is low, as the packet delivery ratios of the three protocols are similar and maintained above 95%. As the node velocity increases, the packet delivery ratios of the three protocols continuously decrease. In comparison, the AO-AOMDV calculates the optimal route using an arithmetic optimization algorithm, which effectively reduces the number of control packets for route rediscovery and decreases the node buffer occupancy. In contrast, other traditional routing protocols use the shortest route, which can lead to congestion and packet loss, resulting in performance degradation. Therefore, the AO-AOMDV demonstrates a significantly higher packet delivery ratio compared to traditional algorithms. When the velocity exceeds 35 m/s, the probability of link breakage increases due to excessive speed, leading to a faster decline in the packet delivery ratios of the three protocols.  
Figure 4 indicates the average E2E delay of the compared routing protocols for varying UAV velocities. When the movement velocity is less than 20 m/s, the delay of the AO-AOMDV protocol is slightly higher than that of the traditional protocols. This is due to the presence of the arithmetic optimization algorithm, which leads to a slightly higher number of hops in the AO-AOMDV protocol, resulting in additional forwarding delay. As the velocity increases, nodes frequently enter and exit, and once a link breakage occurs along  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Parameter** & **Value** \\ \hline Simulator & NS3 \\ Maximum number of nodes & 100 \\
3D network dimension & 2000 m \(\times\) 2000 m \(\times\) 300 m \\ MAC protocol & IEEE 802.11n \\ Bandwidth & 20 MHz \\ Velocity & 10–40 m/s \\ CBR rate & 1 Mbps \\ Transport protocol & UDP \\ Mobility model & 3D Gauss Markov mobility model \\ Simulation time & 600 s \\ Compared routing protocol & AOMDV, AODV \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Simulation parameters.  
Figure 2: 3D deployment of UAV nodes for simulation.  
the path, the route discovery process needs to be repeated, increasing the discovery delay, which becomes more pronounced with higher velocities. The AO-AOMDV utilizes the arithmetic optimization algorithm to reduce the probability of link breakage and avoid path congestion. Therefore, when the velocity exceeds 30 m/s, the AO-AOMDV demonstrates good performance in terms of delay.  
Figure 5 shows the network lifetime of the compared routing protocols for varying UAV velocities. With the increase in node movement velocity, rapid mobility benefits the average energy consumption of nodes, leading to a gradual increase in the lifetime of the three protocols. Due to the consideration of remaining node energy in the AO-AOMDV, the arithmetic optimization algorithm protects nodes with lower energy during path selection in the later stages of network transmission, thereby maximizing network lifetime.  
Figure 4: Average end-to-end delay for varying UAV velocities.  
Figure 3: PDR for varying UAV velocities.