## 4 Radioplanning Analysis  
The deployment of two different communication systems has been analyzed within the considered scenario. Firstly, the ZigBee technology has been evaluated. Specifically, the wireless devices used for simulation have been both, the XBee Pro and Xbee motes from Digi International Inc. The differences between them are mainly due to larger transmitter power of the Xbee Pro and its longer range distance. The transmitted power level considered has been reduced to the minimum default value to analyze worst case conditions. Losses due to different weather conditions and foliage have been introduced according to [30], adding 3 dB of losses. In addition, Bluetooth low energy (BLE) and classic Bluetooth have been also evaluated. BLE is an emerging wireless technology developed by the Bluetooth special interest group for short-range communications. In contrast with classic Bluetooth, BLE has been designed as a low-power solution for control and monitoring applications. The transmitted power and sensitivity for the different communication systems considered is shown in Table 3. It must be pointed out that the data of BLE and classic Bluetooth has been obtained from the literature [31]. Figure 12 shows the linear distributions of received power along the Y-axis for different values of X for different heights in the case of ZigBee and for one meter height in the case of Bluetooth. Figure 12a,b show the comparison between the received power of XBee Pro and XBee with the sensitivity of each of them. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **ZigBee** & **ZigBee** & **Bluetooth-Low** & **Bluetooth** & **Bluetooth** & **Bluetooth** \\  & **Xbee Pro** & **Xbee** & **Energy** & **Class 1** & **Class 2** & **Class 3** \\ \hline Transmitted power & 10 dBm & 10 dBm & \(-\)20 dBm & 10 dBm & 20 dBm & 4 dBm & 0 dBm \\ Sensitivity & \(-\)100 dBm & \(-\)92 dBm & \(-\)93 dBm & \(-\)87 dBm & \(-\)90 dBm & \(-\)90 dBm & \(-\)90 dBm & \(-\)90 dBm \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Parameters for the different considered wireless communication systems. Figure 12: Comparison of radial of received power (dBm) along the Y-axis with the receiver sensitivity (**a**) ZigBee Xbee Pro and ZigBee Xbee for X = 12.5 m (**b**) ZigBee Xbee Pro and ZigBee Xbee for X = 16.5 m (**c**) BLE system (**d**) Classic Bluetooth. Figure 12c shows the comparison between BLE with the maximum and minimum transmitted power and the higher and lower receiver sensitivity depending of which type of BLE has being used. Figure 12d shows the comparison between Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 of classic Bluetooth. It can be seen that there are some points where the signal goes down below the sensitivity level. With these values, an optimal design of the wireless sensor network coverage can be obtained, as shown in Figure 13.  
Another important parameter to be considered when designing a WSN is capacity. Once coverage levels are satisfied, in order to have a good quality of service in the communication link, we must have adequate capacity. The channel capacity is determined by the number of users who are connected to the same communication link at the same time, the data rate of the transceivers and the number of gateways in which the information is gathered. Figure 13: Radioplanning coverage for different technologies within the considered vegetation environment. Figure 12: _Cont._  
With this information, Figures 14 and 15 show the channel capacity _vs._ the number of users for different data rates considered and for different number of gateways. It is observed as expected that if the information is gathered with a higher number of gateways, the channel capacity increases for the same number of users, for every data rate considered. Figure 14: Channel capacity (bps) _vs._ the number of users for different number of gateways considered (**a**) Data Rate = 4800 bps; (**b**) Data Rate = 19,200 bps; (**c**) Data Rate = 57,600 bps; (**d**) Data Rate = 115,200 bps.