Source: https://mafiadoc.com/collision-avoidance-protocol-for-inter-vehicular-communication_5b563a22097c47ef308b4574.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 06:29:45+00:00

Document:
inter-vehicular communication (IVC) including vehicle-to-vehicle. (V2V) and ......  B. Hughes, R. Meier, R. Cunningham, and V. Cahill, âTowards real-.
above follow Arithmetic Logic Unit (ALU) based architecture for arithmetic and logical operations which involve a lot of instructions and hence clock cycles .
Vast amounts of research has been done on the subject of collision avoidance. However ..... Bias vector. X(ur). Force coefficient in sway. Y (ur). Force coefficient in sway. â .... The Coriolis-centripetal matrix can be parameterized in many ways.
Jul 25, 1997 - the capabilities to detect possible collisions between two vehicles which are modeled ... soids remain ellipsoids in any subsequent elastic deformation. ..... as shown in Figure 4 in the spirit of well-known pin-ball algorithm 2 .
Aug 1, 1999 - SPRING REF x The unstretched length of the suspension springs (s in equation. (1.17)) m]. C1 x C2 y Front and rear spring constants N=m].
arctan. ~v ey. ~v ex. : (1.19). In this equation, R! denotes the circumferential ...... else if ((dist_34>sqrt(rad3*rad3-LANEWIDTH*LANEWIDTH)+sqrt(rad4*rad4-.
333, Taiwan. Email: â [email protected],. â¡ [email protected] ... In this paper, we propose a pipelining multi-channel (Ï-Mc) MAC protocol.
Denise R. Jones and Lawrence J. Prinzel, III. National .... traffic were not available to the Evaluation Pilots ..... Captain was the designated pilot flying throughout.
of frequency dependent weighting matrices in the control structure. ... AUTONOMOUS unmanned aerial systems (UASs) are becoming increasingly more ..... all possible paths in the lateral plane before a last resort to diving or climbing.
Decision Making for Collision Avoidance Systems. Jonas Jansson, Jonas Johansson. Volvo Car Corporation. Prof. Fredrik Gustafsson. Linköping University.
Jun 2, 2008 - Center of Gravity. COLREGS International Regulations for Avoiding Collisions at Sea ...... decelerating force Fx,min is estimated to approximately half the forward force. The reduction ......  S. Skogestad and I. Postlethwaite.
38.31. Nissan GTR (R35 - 2011). 32.75. Porsche 911 Turbo S (2011). 39.62. Renault Megane RS250. 36.34. Renault RS Clio 200. 36.43. Subaru Impreza WRX.
Abstract: Vehicle to vehicle communication can give us better results by avoiding the major problems in road like collision of vehicles, better route selection in case of traffic congestion, fuel consumption, suitable selection of parking place etc. This paper presents a protocol to avoid the collision of vehicles. High mobility and fast topology changes are the characteristics of Vehicular Adhoc Networks (VANETs). To establish the real world environment for VANETs, network simulator NS2 is used. Medium Access Control (MAC) Protocol is used to avoid the collision of transmitted data. The Simulation is done using the proposed Vehicular Adhoc On-demand Distance Vector (VAODV) routing protocol, which is a modification of Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocol. The proposed VAODV protocol is continuously checks the distance, speed of each vehicle and if it finds that the distance between vehicles is continuously decreasing then in this case it will send a warning textual message to those vehicles that are in accidental situation. Based on this textual information these vehicles will take particular action like vehicle may choose new route if it exists or it may slow down its own speed or it may stop moving by pressing brake. The experimental results are used to find out the performance of VAODV protocol. The performance of VAODV protocol is analyzed with different parameters like end to end delay, throughput, packet delivery ratio, normalized routing load etc.
1. INTRODUCTION Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) consist numbers of sensor nodes and they work together to perform a specific task. In WSN base-stations gather the data from all other sensor devices in the networks. Sensor devices are adequate to sense the physical entities. The sensors are equipped with rechargeable batteries . The sensor nodes are communicated through the wireless medium. In WSN usually, all sensor nodes are not reachable to all other sensor nodes. It is a multi-hop network . Components of sensor devices (Fig. 1) are: a sensing and actuation unit (array or single element), a power unit, a processing unit, a communication unit and other application-dependent units  .
leave the network at any point of time, sensor devices are having limited power, limited computational capabilities and limited memory, ability to deal with sensor device failure etc. WSN used in various applications like forest fire detection, flood detection, automated meter reading, vehicle tracking and detection, traffic flow surveillance and many more .
1.1 Vehicular Ad-hoc Network VANETs are special type of mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs). The basic architecture of vehicular network is shown in Fig. 2.
International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research Volume 4– Issue 10, 767 - 776, 2015, ISSN: 2319–8656 It is a self organizing network which consists of numbers of vehicles. In VANETs, each vehicle is equipped with a device called on-board unit (OBU) which is capable to communicate with other OBUs and road-side units (RSU) using a routing protocol through WSNs. RSU can communicate with the other RSUs. Some RSUs can be used as gateways. Based on these communications VANETs can provide road safety, comfort of driving etc   .
1.2 IEEE 802.15.4 We have used IEEE 802.15.4 standard MAC protocol in our simulation. IEEE 802.15.4 defines the MAC and physical Layers of wireless sensor networks . It is developed for very low power, low cost, moving devices and for short range wireless communications. It gives support to connect devices are in the field of applications like vehicular, industrial, agricultural, residential and medical sensor etc . The standard is pertinent for self-organizing network along with the essence of network flexibility. The IEEE 802.15.4 standard MAC sub-layers uses the carrier sense multiple access with collision avoidance (CSMA-CA) mechanism for beacon transmission . There are two modes in IEEE 802.15.4 standard: beaconless and the beacon enabled mode. In beaconless mode it uses the pure CSMA-CA for channel access and works as a basic IEEE 802.11 standard without channel reservations. In beacon enabled mode it uses the hybrid time division multiple access (TDMA). In case of time critical transmission it uses guaranteed time slot(GTS) mechanism to reserve a dedicated time slot within a superframe  . In a Link-layer security is implemented or designed with 128 bit advanced encryption standard (AES) encryption . In beacon enable mode the source periodically sends beacons for sensor nodes synchronization and to establish the personal area networks (PANs). Each super-frame has two parts active and inactive part. Active part is composed of: a beacon, a contention access period (CAP) and a contention free period (CFP) . IEEE 802.15.4 standard is responsible for acknowledging frame delivery, frame validation, beacon management, GTS management, channel access mechanism, supervise device security etc .
1.3 AODV Routing protocol AODV protocol is the advancement of Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector Routing (DSDV) protocol. AODV is classified as a pure on-demand route acquisition system; nodes do not maintain any routing information or do not exchange any routing table that are not presents in the chosen path. In AODV all the routes are discovered when it is required and are maintained as far as these are being used. Routes are found out through route discovery process. Route discovery starts if a source node required a valid route to some destination node .
A route request (RREQ) packet broadcast to all its neighboring nodes by the source node, they again sends the RREQ packet to their neighbors and so on, until destination node found or an intermediate nodes with a route that is fresh enough to reach the destination is found   . The propagation of route request is shown in Fig. 3. AODV utilizes the sequence number that is maintained by all destinations for avoiding routing loops as well as to analyze the newness of routing information . Broadcast ID and node sequence number is maintained by the node itself. For each RREQ made by a node, the Broadcast ID and the IP address are incremented by one for to uniquely identify a RREQ. The source node includes the destination node most recent sequence number and destination IP address, as well as current sequence number of its own and broadcast ID in RREQ  . Intermediate node can reply to the RREQ if it has a valid route to reach destination with sequence number greater than or equal to that of the sequence number presents in the RREQ otherwise it rebroadcasts the RREQ  .
While forwarding the RREQ intermediate nodes record the neighboring node address from where first RREQ packet was received into their own routing table using that information establishes a reverse path to source (Fig. 4). The RREQ packets that are already received if it came later again all these packets are discarded  . When the destination gets the RREQ packet or intermediates with fresh enough route, the destination or intermediate replied by unicasting a Route Reply (RREP) control packet back to the neighboring node from which first received the RREQ packet  . When the source node received the RREP a complete bidirectional path is establish and the source can start transmission by using this discovered route    .
International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research Volume 4– Issue 10, 767 - 776, 2015, ISSN: 2319–8656 well as to run the simulation and packet tracing which is a text based packet tracing and Network AniMation (NAM) packet tracing . The basic architecture of network simulator is shown in Fig. 5.
Step 1: Find the co-ordinates of vehicles in milliseconds and store results into the variables X, Y and Z. That means we are storing the location of vehicles. Here we have assumed that the co-ordinate Z is always to be Zero because vehicles are not flying.
In this case (Fig. 6), both of the vehicles A and B are moving towards each other at a speed of 100 km/h. Initially distance between them is 300 meters. Vehicle B is the source node and vehicle A is the destination node. Vehicle B is monitoring its distance from vehicle A continuously and the moment it found that the distance monitored is less than or equal to the warning distance it will immediately send a warning textual message to the destination vehicle A. The vehicle A will take action according to the received textual message and gives a response to the sender.
Step 4: If the distance between vehicles is less than or equal to warning distance then monitoring vehicle will send a textual warning message to the monitored Vehicle.
In this case (Fig. 7), vehicle B is moving towards the west and the vehicle A is moving towards north. Both of the vehicles are moving at a speed of 100 km/h. Initially distance between them is 212.1320 meters. Vehicle B is the source node and vehicle A is the destination node. Vehicle B is monitoring its distance from vehicle A continuously and the moment it found that the distance monitored is less than or equal to the warning distance it will immediately send a warning textual message to the destination vehicle A. The vehicle A will take action according to the received textual message and gives a response to the sender.
International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research Volume 4– Issue 10, 767 - 776, 2015, ISSN: 2319–8656 In this case (Fig. 8), vehicle B is moving towards the west, the vehicle A is moving towards the north and the vehicle C is moving towards south. All the three vehicles are moving at speed of 100 km/h. Initially distance between vehicle B and vehicle A is 212.1320 meters, between vehicle B and vehicle C is also 212.1320 meters and between vehicle A and C is 300 meters. Vehicle B is the source node and vehicle A, vehicle C are the destination nodes. Vehicle B is monitoring its distance from vehicle A and vehicle C continuously and the moment it found that the distance monitored is less than or equal to the warning distance it will immediately send a warning textual message to the destination vehicle. The destination vehicle will take action according to the received textual message and gives a response to the sender.
It is the number of routing packets transmitted per data packets delivered at the destinations  .
In this case (Fig. 9), vehicle A and vehicle B both are moving in the same direction towards east. Vehicle A is moving at a speed of 100 km/h and the vehicle B is moving at a speed of 70km/h. Initially distance between them is 300 meters. Vehicle B is the source node and vehicle A is the destination node. Vehicle B is monitoring its distance from vehicle A continuously and the moment it found that the distance monitored is less than or equal to the warning distance it will immediately send a warning textual message to the destination vehicle A. The vehicle A will take action according to the received textual message and gives a response to the sender.
It is the number of bits received per unit time by the destination node. It is represented in kilo bits per seconds (kbps)  .
Where ‘End Time-Start Time’ is the data transmission period. Packet Delivery Ratio Ratio of the number of data packets successfully delivered to the destinations to those generated by the sources  .
Driver Reaction Time Time of the accidental message received and the time of bakes are applied.
0.75 sec is the time taken by the driver to step his foot onto the brake pedal and press the brake .
International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research Volume 4– Issue 10, 767 - 776, 2015, ISSN: 2319–8656 driver thinking time is 1 sec. The results are shown in Fig. 3135.
Where MRT is the Message Receive Time, AT is the time taken by the OBU to give an alarm and DTT is the Driver Thinking Time.
Fig. 30: MTD vs. Distance left for Scenario Four In these figures Fig. 10-30 the End-to-End Delay, NRL, Throughput and PDR for four scenarios are calculated vs. vehicle distance means when the distance between any two vehicles is less than the warning distance the communication starts between these two vehicles and immediately the warning message sends. The warning distance is set as 50, 60, 70, . . . , 200 meters. The above figure shows the value of the End-to-End Delay, NRL, Throughput and PDR for different warning distance. The parameter Distance Left after Brake Initiation is also calculated vs. vehicle distance and shown in above, which is very important for to find out at what particular distance the warning message needs to send for what particular speed.
In this paper we have modified the AODV routing protocol named as VAODV which is used to simulate and also to analyze the VANETs. To find out the performance of the protocol the different parameters are calculated like End-toEnd Delay, NRL, Throughput and PDR vs. vehicle distance for four different scenarios. Our simulation result shows that in case of Scenario One where vehicles are at a speed of 100km/h moving towards each other, the braking distance 4060 meters (Fig. 14) will be left if the warning message is sent at a warning distance or vehicle distance of 90-110 meters. In case of Scenario Two where vehicles are moving at a speed of 100km/h, the braking distance 40-60 meters (Fig. 19) will be left if the warning message is sent at a warning distance or vehicle distance of 80-100 meters. In case of Scenario Three where vehicles are moving at a speed of 100 km/h, the braking distance 40-60 meters (Fig. 24, 25) will be left if the warning message is sent at a warning distance or vehicle distance of 80-100 meters. In case of Scenario Four where vehicles are moving in the same direction, one is at a speed of 100 km/h and another is at a speed of 70 km/h, the braking distance 40-60 meters (Fig. 30) will be left if the warning message is sent at a warning distance or vehicle distance of 50-70 meters.
6. FUTURE WORK In the near future we plan to extend our work by giving more security to our VAODV protocol. We will also look into other factors like reliability by developing a trust based routing mechanism to track the misbehaving vehicles which is very important from the prospects of VANETs.
7. REFERENCES  A. Iyer, S. S. Kulkarni, V. Mhatre and C. P. Rosenberg, 2008, “A Taxonomy-based Approach to Design of Large-scale Sensor Networks”, Springer, pp. 3-33.  T. AL-Khdour and U. Baroudi, 2011, “Literature Review of MAC, Routing and Cross Layer Design Protocols for WSN”, InTech, pp. 1-27.  I. F. Akyildiz and I. H. Kasimoglu, 2004, “Wireless sensor and actor networks: research challenges”, ELSEVIER Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 351367.
 C. K. Singh, A. Kumar and P. M. Ameer, 2008, “Performance evaluation of an IEEE 802.15.4 sensor network with a star topology”, Springer Science & Business Media, vol. 14, pp. 543-568.  L. K. Bandyopadhyay, S. K. Chaulya and P. K. Mishra, 2009, “Wireless Communication in Underground Mines: RFID-based Sensor Networking”, Springer Science & Business Media, pp. 1-477.  E. M. Royer and C. K. Toh, 1999, “A review of current routing protocols for ad hoc mobile wireless networks”, IEEE Personal Communications, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 46-55.
 K. Sohraby, D. Minoli and T. Znati, 2007, “Wireless Sensor Networks: Technology, Protocols, and Applications”,WILEY-INTERSCIENCE, vol. 1, pp. 1307.
 X. H. Lin, Y. K. Kwok and V. K. N. Lau, 2005, “A quantitative comparison of ad hoc routing protocols with and without channel adaptation”, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 111-128.
 J. Liu, Z. Yang and I. Stojmenovic, 2013, “Receiver Consensus: On-Time Warning Delivery for Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks”, IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 57-68.
 C. E. Perkins, E. M. Royer, S. R. Das and M. K. Marina, 2001, “Performance comparison of two on-demand routing protocols for ad hoc networks” , IEEE Personal Communications, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 16-28.
 K. A. Hafeez, L. Zhao, B. Ma and J. W. Mark, 2013, “Performance Analysis and Enhancement of the DSRC for VANET’s Safety Applications”, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 62, no. 7, pp. 3069-3083.
 C. E. Perkins and E. M. Royer, 1999, “Ad-hoc ondemand distance vector routing”, Second IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, 1999. Proceedings. WMCSA '99, New Orleans, LA, pp. 90-100.
 H. A. Omar, W. Zhuang, A. Abdrabou and L. Li, 2013, “Performance Evaluation of VeMAC Supporting Safety Applications in Vehicular Networks”, IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 6983.
 J. H. Song, V. W. S. Wong and V. C. M. Leung, 2004, “Efficient on-demand routing for mobile ad hoc wireless access networks”, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 1374-1383.
 W. Ikram, S. Petersen, P. Orten and N. F. Thornhill, 2014, “Adaptive Multi-Channel Transmission Power Control for Industrial Wireless Instrumentation”, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 978-990.  J. A. Gutierrez, M. Naeve, E. Callaway, M. Bourgeois, V. Mitter and B. Heile, 2001, “IEEE 802.15.4: a developing standard for low-power low-cost wireless personal area networks”, IEEE Network, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 12-19.  Y. Huang, A. Pang and H. Hung, 2008, “An Adaptive GTS Allocation Scheme for IEEE 802.15.4”, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 641-651.
 T. Issariyakul and E. Hossain, 2011, “Introduction to Network Simulator NS2”, Springer Science & Business Media, vol. 2, pp. 1-536.  L. Shrivastava, S. S. Bhadauraia, G. S. Tomar and B. K. Chaurasia, 2013, “Secure Congestion Adaptive Routing Using Group Signature Scheme”, Springer Transactions on Computational Science XVII, vol. 7420, pp. 101-115.  M. Green, 2000, “How long does it take to stop? Methodological analysis of driver perception-brake times”, Transportation Human Factors, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 195-216.  Safe Drive Training [Online]. http://www.sdt.com.au/safedrive-directorySTOPPINGDISTANCE.htm.
 Z. Shelby and C. Bormann, 2011, “6LoWPAN: The Wireless Embedded Internet”, John Wiley & Sons, pp. 1244.
Report "Collision Avoidance Protocol for Inter Vehicular Communication"

References: V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.