# Bat Optimized Link State Routing Protocol for Energy-Aware Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks
## 5 Simulation and Result
### Experimental Results and Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Model** & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Simulation Time**} \\ \hline
**Criterion** & **Protocol** & & **10** & **20** & **30** & **40** & **50** & **60** & **70** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{PDR} & \multirow{2}{*}{OLSR} & Mean & 70.23 & 72.89 & 74.05 & 77.37 & 80.22 & 82.53 & 85.39 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 3.61 & 6.85 & 2.84 & 5.02 & 4.06 & 6.02 & 3.44 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 73.8 & 75.1 & 77.31 & 80.19 & 83.3 & 84.13 & 88.31 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 4.85 & 6.55 & 3.83 & 5.28 & 2.49 & 5.79 & 6.56 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 76.61 & 78.91 & 79.73 & 83.51 & 87.87 & 89.99 & 91.01 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 2.55 & 6.93 & 5.26 & 7.05 & 5.97 & 6.69 & 5.59 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 78.36 & 80.63 & 83.71 & 86.3 & 90.91 & 93.2 & 95.25 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 3.05 & 5.56 & 3.77 & 5.95 & 4.39 & 6.13 & 4.86 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{E2E} & \multirow{2}{*}{OLSR} & Mean & 11.61 & 17.55 & 20.22 & 26.56 & 30.68 & 32.12 & 33.11 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 3.24 & 5.44 & 3.39 & 4.67 & 3.67 & 3.85 & 3.49 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 10.12 & 16.54 & 18.85 & 22.68 & 27.11 & 29.71 & 30.25 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 4.06 & 5.70 & 3.74 & 5.55 & 4.21 & 5.83 & 5.52 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 9.67 & 13.1 & 16.34 & 20.21 & 25.07 & 27.87 & 28.23 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 3.50 & 4.87 & 3.13 & 3.39 & 4.51 & 3.74 & 3.27 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 8.07 & 11.78 & 14.37 & 18.41 & 21.61 & 24.21 & 26.31 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 3.67 & 4.35 & 3.32 & 4.88 & 3.30 & 4.59 & 3.76 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{ROR} & \multirow{2}{*}{OLSR} & Mean & 39.74 & 41.78 & 43.62 & 47.16 & 48.27 & 49.92 & 50.12 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 0.84 & 4.16 & 2.07 & 1.34 & 3.08 & 1.30 & 3.21 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 34.19 & 36.29 & 39.83 & 43.02 & 44.54 & 46.28 & 47.34 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 2.88 & 2.55 & 3.29 & 2.95 & 1.73 & 3.11 & 4.02 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 33.11 & 35.04 & 39.44 & 42.34 & 42.67 & 44.85 & 46.91 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 1.13 & 3.21 & 2.21 & 3.58 & 1.81 & 3.85 & 2.83 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 31.97 & 33.07 & 38.29 & 40.66 & 41.53 & 43.33 & 45.26 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 1.64 & 2.95 & 1.43 & 3.44 & 1.98 & 4.16 & 2.23 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{EC} & \multirow{2}{*}{OLSR} & Mean & 33 & 54 & 67 & 79 & 98 & 103 & 111 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 15.69 & 25.21 & 14.40 & 22.07 & 16.17 & 30.19 & 18.64 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 25 & 46 & 53 & 65 & 87 & 92 & 103 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 16.95 & 23.53 & 10.55 & 18.74 & 9.56 & 24.27 & 10.22 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 23 & 39 & 48 & 62 & 84 & 89 & 99 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 14.40 & 20.53 & 11.72 & 16.55 & 17.38 & 10.59 & 21.31 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & Mean & 20 & 32 & 45 & 60 & 79 & 86 & 97 \\ \cline{2-9}  & & SD & 18.99 & 20.65 & 13.46 & 19.23 & 13.57 & 17.82 & 12.78 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Scenario 3: The simulation time. The effect of the number of nodes on the E2E delay for the BOLSR, CAABO, EBOLSR, and OLSR is depicted in Figure 10. The E2E delay of the nodes is steadily decreased when the number of nodes is increased, and the highest E2E delay is recorded in the OLSR as Figure 10a,b shows. In all the four protocols, the increase of the number of nodes makes the connection between the nodes easier and requires less time. The BOLSR achieves the lowest E2E delay because the increase of the number of nodes gives it the flexibility to identify nodes with high energy capacity which stabilizes the paths. In the second scenario, the variation of the speed of nodes is evaluated against PDR, E2E delay, EC, and ROR. The results of the node speed scenario are shown in Table 4.  
Figure 8: Routing overhead ratio (ROR) vs. No. of nodes. Figure 10: End-To-End (E2E) delay vs. No. of nodes. Figure 9: Energy Consumption (EC) vs. No. of nodes. Based on Table 4, the effect of the node speed on the routing overhead of the four protocols is shown in Figure 11. In general, when the node speed increases from 1 to 11 m/s, the routing overhead ratio increases too.