# Multilayered Network Model for Mobile Network Infrastructure Disruption
## 6 Simulations and Results
### Simulation Scenarios
#### 6.1.1 Simulation Scenario 1  
This simulation scenario is intended to highlight the benefits of adding a MANET layer to a WSN network. The scenario itself consists of a 100 m \(\times\) 100 m simulation area, where 400 WSN sensors are randomly distributed. The simulation assumes the use of IEEE 802.15.4 ZigBee communication technology with the RPL-Weigth routing protocol using the 6 LoWPAN in WSN layer.  
Based on ZigBee technology, a radio range between WSN sensors is set to 10 m with a data rate of 30 Kbps. Data rate was randomly generated on each link between WSN sensors in the range of \(\pm\)50%. This range should take into account the unforeseen effects of the environment on the data rate.  
Besides the WSN layer sensors, 20 MANET nodes are also randomly placed in the area. MANET nodes uses IEEE 802.11 Wi-Fi technology with the 802.11n standard for communication and IPv6 OLSR protocol. This allows the nodes to set the radio range to 40 m at a data rate of 100 Mbps.  
Data rates of MANET layer were randomly generated on each MANET link from the range of \(\pm\)50%. There is also one AP in the network, which has the same radio range and data rate as MANET nodes. The individual variables of the simulation scenario can be seen in Table 1.  
In this scenario, one WSN sensor is chosen as a source node that attempts to send urgent data for processing to the relevant application or service on the Internet. The role of routing protocols in all simulation scenarios mentioned in this paper used by each layer of MNM is to find the optimal routing path. All routing paths are selected according to the data rates generated on each link and number of hops in therm of [PERSON] shortest path algorithm.  
To illustrate the benefits over traditional WSN network and two layers of WSN and MANET networks, a single access point in the network was strategically placed sequentially in three different positions:* _Position 1_--left upper corner of the simulation area, relatively in close proximity to AP
* _Position 2_--in the middle of simulation area
* _Position 3_--right lower corner of the simulation area. The farthest point from WSN source sensor  
The positions of AP mentioned above with devices placed in the simulation area are depicted in Figure 14a for WSN scenario and in Figure 15a for WSN-MANET scenario. Optimal routing paths for both scenarios are depicted on second part of mentioned figures marked as Figure 14b and Figure 15b respectively.  
Figure 14 illustrates the network layout with WSN nodes (blue markers), WSN sensor gateways (green markers) and AP depicted by the Wi-Fi router illustration. The WSN sensor gateways are selected by the RPL-Weight protocol in the sense of so-called \"sink mobility\" (Section 4.1). WSN source sensor is marked with the ID number of 393 and highlighted by a blue mark with a red edge.  
Figure 15 illustrates the first layer of the WSN sensors (blue marks) with WSN sensor gateways (green marks). The MANET nodes (red marks) of second layer are distributed evenly throughout the area. There is an AP depicted by Wi-Fi router illustration and the WSN source sensor depicted by a blue mark with a red edge and ID number of 393.  
These simulation scenarios were run 1000 times, always with the same position distribution of WSN and MANET nodes in an effort to illustrate the difference in performance and parameters of the two networks.