Overview and Analysis of the Performances of ZigBeebased Wireless Sensor Networks

Mihajlov, Boris; Bogdanoski, Mitko

doi:10.5120/3704-5138

Cited by 53 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Th is technology is simpler and less expensive than other W-P/L/M-ANs (Wireless-Personal /Local/Metropolitan-Area Networks) like Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, Wi-Max, etc. [20,14] In the paper, we have made some simulation experiments in OPNET with ZigBee standard at the physical and communication layers between on port workers' and supervisors' body area sub-networks composed of a set of active and passive sensors, RFID tags, ID badges, BCUs, several moving and fi xed routers, and the coordinator, in order to allow permanent insight into employees' and their personal protective equipment (PPE) garment presence and functionality at the terminal.…”

Section: The Zigbee: In Briefmentioning

confidence: 99%

MANET vs. ZigBee: Some simulation experiments at the seaport environment

Bauk¹,

Gonzalez²,

Schmeink³

et al. 2017

JITA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The paper presents the results of some OPNET simulation experiments realized with an aim to benchmark MANET and ZigBee networks' performances at the seaport environment. The MANET is formed among workers' and supervisors' personal digital assistants (PDAs). On the other side, the ZigBee is established between end-nodes or employees' body central units (BCUs), which collect signals from several active and passive devices embedded into ID badges and personal protective equipment (PPE) pieces; several moving and fi xed routers; and the coordinator mounted at the appropriate seaport location. The simulation experiments are realized over the layout of the Port of Bar (Montenegro) container and general cargo terminal by taking into account the real number of workers and supervisors engaged at the terminal per each shift. This research work should give an insight to the seaport's managers and stakeholders into some advantages and disadvantages of these two considered wireless networks' schemes, and to motivate them to provide conditions for implementing these or similar on seaport and backend info-communication solutions for uprising the level of occupational safety and overall seaport's environmental management system.

show abstract

Section: The Zigbee: In Briefmentioning

confidence: 99%

MANET vs. ZigBee: Some simulation experiments at the seaport environment

Bauk¹,

Gonzalez²,

Schmeink³

et al. 2017

JITA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In peer-to-peer topology, the communication model is de-centralized, and, any device can communicate with any other device within its radio range directly. The cluster-tree topology is a special case of the peer-to-peer topology with a distributed synchronization mechanism [20]. Figure 1 …”

Section: System Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Denial of Service Attacks for Wireless Sensor Networks

Bahl¹,

Sharma²,

Verma³

2012

IJCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On denial-of-service (DoS) attacks for wireless sensor networks (WSNs), we investigated the security aspects of the physical layer. We conducted the simulative performance analysis of jamming attacks for signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), bit error rate (BER), network throughput and packet delivery ratio (PDR) using IEEE 802.15.4 based OPNET simulative model for WSN under constant and varying intensity of jamming attacks. Under constant jamming attack, simulations revealed that average sink node PDR degrades from 79.01% in a normal scenario, to 59.22% in jammed scenario. Also, normal scenario shows maximum PDR of 89.68% and minimum PDR of 70.02% while jammed scenario shows a maximum PDR of 64.93% and minimum PDR of 49.90%. Under varying intensity of jamming attack, simulations revealed that average sink node PDR decreases, from 79.01% in a normal scenario, by 5.54%, 4.53%, 6.36% and 3.35% with the introduction of one, two, three and four jammers respectively. Further, the average SNR decreases, from 73.59%, in a normal scenario, by 5.43%, 5.63%, 10.44% and 20.39% with the introduction of one, two, three and four jammers respectively. KeywordsWireless Sensor Network (WSN), ZigBee, Security, Denial of Service (DoS), Jamming Attack. 1.INTRODUCTIONThe devices, called sensor nodes, find their wide-spread applications in local processing and wireless communications because they are economical, low-power consuming, small in size and easily deployable. Sensor network refers to a heterogeneous system combining tiny sensors and actuators with general-purpose computing elements [1,2]. These networks constitute a large number of self-organizing, massively deployed, low-power, low-cost wireless nodes with applications in the ocean and wildlife monitoring, machinery performance monitoring, building safety monitoring, earthquake monitoring, and many more battlefields applications. Future applications may include highway-traffic monitoring, pollution monitoring, emergency response systems, disaster relief networks, forest-fire detection, land sliding monitoring, volcano-eruption monitoring systems, fault monitoring on railway tracks and environmental monitoring [3,4]. Ensuring security in WSNs is a challenging task because of various constraints. First, sensor nodes usually have limited resources like -battery power, memory, and computational capabilities. Second, sensor nodes are usually deployed unattended hostile environment and are built without any intrusion detection and prevention in mind. An adversary can easily target a few sensor nodes without being easily noticed and hence, can launch a variety of attacks. Thus, any security mechanism for sensor networks has to be resilient to compromised sensor nodes. Third, most of the sensor applications are based on local computation and communication, while attackers have better computational and energy capabilities. Often, one has to use resource constrained sensor nodes to deal with very powerful attackers. So, traditional security techniques used in wired networks cannot be...

show abstract

“…It realizes the seamless connection between people and the monitoring area through sensor nodes scattered in the monitoring area and real-time monitoring of environmental regions [14]. As a concrete form of WSN, Zig-Bee has the advantages of low rate, low power consumption, low cost, self-organizing network and selfrepairing ability [15]. It has been applied to monitor coal fire and locate spontaneous combustion fire sources on each layer in some coal mines, yielding relevant research results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of WSN Fire Monitoring System in Coal Mining

Bai¹

2017

Int. J. Onl. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Targeted at the potential fire in coal mine production, this paper proposes a coal mine fire monitoring system based on Zig-bee technology, and discusses the network data transmission process in the system. When the system is applied to an actual coal mine, it achieves a sound fire monitoring effect. The wireless sensor network (WSN) coal mine fire monitoring system consists of such three subsystems as data acquisition subsystem, control center subsystem and emergency response subsystem. With sensor nodes as the basic unit, the WSN is divided into five parts: sensor module, treatment module, wireless communication module, location module and power supply module. The system can monitor the air temperature, humidity and smoke concentration of fire in the coal mine, and provide effective basis for monitoring department to make decisions on fire prevention and control measures. The on-site monitoring test shows that, in the event of a fire, the WSN can monitor the trend of fire in the coal mine effectively, reflect the temperature distribution in details, and issue alarms accurately. The conclusion offers a theoretical reference for the development of coal mine fire monitoring technology.

show abstract

Overview and Analysis of the Performances of ZigBeebased Wireless Sensor Networks

Cited by 53 publications

References 11 publications

MANET vs. ZigBee: Some simulation experiments at the seaport environment

MANET vs. ZigBee: Some simulation experiments at the seaport environment

On Denial of Service Attacks for Wireless Sensor Networks

Application of WSN Fire Monitoring System in Coal Mining

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About