# Efficient Opportunistic Routing Protocol for Sensor Network in Emergency Applications
## 5 Simulation Model, Setup and Results
### Simulation Results  
Figures 8-11 illustrate the performance of the proposed ODCR opportunistic routing protocol in terms of network energy consumption, packet loss, throughput, and packet delivery ratio. Each simulation runs for 200 s. We evaluate the performance of the proposed ODCR protocol over a number of rounds. The output is the average of outputs received in a certain number of rounds. In this simulation, energy consumption is calculated using the data transmission and reception energy consumptions of a node (Equations (11) and (12)), presented in the energy model, and the estimated number of message transmissions for each approach, analyzed in Section 4.2. Figure 8 demonstrates that the energy consumption of the proposed ODCR protocol is much lower than the existing TEEN and LEACH clustering protocols. This is because, using Equations (6) and (7), we find that the average message transmission in ODCR is much lower than that in the LEACH and TEEN protocols. Similarly, the number of message transmissions in the ODCR protocol is also lower than LORA protocol (as analyzed using Equation (10)). Hence, the network energy consumption in the proposed ODCR protocol is lower than that of the LORA protocol. Figure 9 demonstrates that the packet loss ratio of the proposed ODCR protocol is much lower than the existing LEACH [18], TEEN [20] and LORA [21] protocols because the proposed ODCR protocol can perform quicker cluster recovery due to node movements compared to the existing algorithms. Hence, the probability of packet loss is much lower in the ODCR protocol. More specifically, in the TEEN protocol, clusters are reconstructed only at the end of each round, regardless of whether any node moves out of the cluster in a round. In LEACH, clusters are reconstructed at the end of a certain number of rounds. Even if a number of nodes move out of clusters and become isolated or noise nodes, the clusters are not formed unless the number of rounds reaches a predefined value. Hence, the probability of packet loss is much higher in LEACH and TEEN protocols. This also results in a lower  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Parameter** & **Value** \\ \hline Simulation network area & \(2000\times 2000\) m\({}^{2}\) \\ Number of node & 100 \\ Communication range of a node & 200 m \\ Transport protocol & UDP \\ MAC protocol & IEEE 802.11 \\ Mobility Model & Random \\ Mobility Speed & 5 m/s \\ Pause time &  
throughput in LEACH and TEEN protocols. On the other hand, in the LORA protocol, a candidate zone is constructed with a set of forwarder nodes for each hop. Moreover, the best forwarder is selected for each candidate zone to create a path from the source to the destination for transmitting data packets. As the nodes are mobile, the probability of moving the forwarder nodes in this preselected path is high. Hence, the probability of packet loss is also high in the LORA protocol. Figure 10 demonstrates that the throughput of the proposed ODCR protocol is much higher than that of the LEACH, TEEN and LORA protocols. This is because the proposed ODCR protocol performs cluster recovery and creates clusters rapidly based on the worst-case scenario of node movements between two adjacent nodes. Existing protocols lose connectivity in such scenario, which is not the case for the proposed ODCR protocol. Figure 8: Comparison of energy consumption. Figure 9: Comparison of packet loss ratio. Similarly, Figure 11 illustrates that the ODCR protocol achieves higher packet delivery ratio compared to LEACH, TEEN and LORA protocols because the proposed ODCR protocol maintains connectivity in most of the mobility scenarios. In the simulation results, we found that, on average, the packet delivery ratio is almost 50% more in the ODCR protocol compared to the LEACH and TEEN protocols and about 15% more in the ODCR protocol compared to the LORA protocol. Table 2 compares several features of the existing LEACH, TEEN, LORA and proposed ODCR protocols. Figure 11: Comparison of packet delivery ratio. Figure 10: Comparison of throughput.