Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
TI Journals
ISSN
2306-6474
Department of Basic Sciences, Benson Idahosa University, PMB 1100, Benin City, Nigeria.
AR TIC LE INF O
AB S TR AC T
Keywords:
In recent years, most Wireless Local Area Networks (WLAN) are based on the IEEE 802.11b, 802.11a,
802.11g or 802.11n standards. These standards define how to wirelessly connect computers or devices to
a network. Wireless enabled devices can send and receive data anywhere within the range of a wireless
access point. The choice of the Wireless LAN protocol depends on the requirements of the individuals or
a company who aims to implement the WLAN infrastructure. Some of the parameters that should be
considered in selecting an appropriate WLAN working protocol are data communications speed and
range. In this paper, an experimental investigation of the impact of packet data communication on IEEE
802.11g OFDM based systems for throughput performance evaluation was conducted on the campus of
Benson Idahosa University. The results at different routes show a very interesting feature that the
throughput is not susceptible to be affected by change in distance between the Aps and the measurement
locations. This may indicates that the data communication links are able to support the required
bandwidth and there are no network failures. It also shows that that the packet drop rate on the
communication links is low. This phenomenon can be explained by the fact that the WLAN system with
OFDM interface can effectively use multipath component because of guard period incorporated in the
system.
Throughput Performance
Packet data
IEEE 802.11g OFDM based Systems
1.
Introduction
The world of wireless telecommunications is fast evolving. Technologies under research and development promise to deliver more services
to more users in less time. The Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) technologies are growing fast with new emerging standards being
developed. WLAN technologies have been leading the Internet distribution in education, business and home environments. 802.11 is a set
of WLAN standards developed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and are mainly used for local wireless
communications in the 2.4 and 5 GHz unlicensed frequency bands [1].
802.11 standards consist of physical layer and media access control (MAC) protocols. Since its first release, there are a number of major
additions and amendments to the physical layer whilst the basic functions of MAC remain largely unchanged. Many 802.11 standards have
been developed over the years to address various aspects of WLAN requirements and are nicely summarized in [2] by Hiert and co. WLAN
devices often advertise their capabilities based on the implemented physical layer version. The popular ones include 802.11b, 802.11a,
802.11g and more recently 802.11n (see table for details).
Table 1. Comparison of IEEE 802.11 physical layer standards
Release
Date
Standard
Band
(GHz)
Bandwidth
(MHz)
Modulation
Advanced Antenna
Technologies
Max Data
Rate
1997
802.11
2.4
20
DSSS, FHSS
N/A
2 Mbps
1999
802.11b
2.4
20
DSSS
N/A
11 Mbps
1999
802.11a
20
OFDM
N/A
54 Mbps
2003
802.11g
2.4, 5
20
DSSS, OFDM
N/A
54 Mbps
2009
802.11n
2.4
20, 40
OFDM
600 Mbps
2013 (exp)
802.11ac
OFDM
MIMO, MU-MIM, up to 8
spatial streams
6.93 Mbps
IEEE 802.11g is based on the orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) modulation technique and the CCK modulation for
backward compatibility with 802.11b. The OFDM physical layer (PHY) provides the capability to transmit data frames at multiple rates up
to 54 Mbps for WLAN networks where transmission of multimedia content is a consideration [3].
* Corresponding author.
Email address: josabone@yahoo.com
428
While wireless networking is classified according to its standards- based signaling rate, such as 54 Mbps for 802.11g, the actual data
throughput, or data being transmitted, is often just a fraction of the theoretical maximum rate. Research conducted by [4] showed that the
user throughput performance changes radically when access points or clients are located near an interfering transmitter or when frequency
planning is not carefully conducted. Data throughput can also be limited due to a number of important environmental and product-specific
factors. Therefore, even though the new 802.11g products available are capable of a 54 Mbps signaling rate, the practical, or actual, data
throughput is more likely to be much less than that (in the 10 12 Mbps range). There are few papers that discuss the performance of the
802.11b standards such as in [5, 6], and to the best of our knowledge, there is no work in the literature that discusses the throughput
performance of 802.11g WLANs in small campus environments.
In this paper, we present a full scale experimental study of throughput performance of IEEE 802.11g, with OFDM interface deployed in
Benson Idahosa University (BIU). Our focus is on evaluation of success rate of packet data communication at the end user application-level
in the studied outdoor WLAN propagation environment.
2.
Experimental Investigation of Throughput Performance of IEEE 802.11g OFDM based Systems in a Campus Environment
429
Thr
3.
PacketDeliverd
(1)
i PacketArrival PacketStarttime
Shown in figure 1-11 are graphs of data throughput performance measured at different measurement locations. As can be observed from the
graphs, the throughput performance at different routes shows a very interesting feature that the throughput is not susceptible to be affected
by change in distance between the Aps and the measurement locations. This indicates that the data communication links are able to support
the required bandwidth and there are no network failures. It also shows that that the packet drop rate on the packet data communication
links is low. This phenomenon can be explained by the fact that the Wifi system with OFDM interface can effectively use multipath
component because of guard period incorporated in the system.
week 1
week 2
week 3
week 4
30
25
Throughput(Mb/s)
Throughput (Mb/s)
25
20
15
10
week 1
week 2
week 3
week 4
30
20
15
10
5
5
20
40
60
Distance(m)
80
100
120
0
0
20
40
Distance(m)
60
80
100
430
28
25
26
24
22
23
week 1
week 2
week 3
week 4
22
21
20
20
Throughput(Mb/s)
Throughput(Mb/s)
24
week 1
week 2
week 3
week 4
18
16
14
12
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
10
12
8
11
10
4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
20
40
60
80
100
120
Distance(m)
Distance(m)
25
24
24
23
week 1
week 2
week 3
week 4
22
21
20
Throughput(Mb/s)
Throughput(Mb/s)
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
week 1
week 2
week 3
week 4
22
18
16
14
12
12
10
11
10
9
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
20
60
80
100
13
20
week 1
week 2
12
week 1
week 2
18
11
16
Throughput(Mb/s)
Throughput(Mb/s)
40
Distance(m)
Distance(m)
10
9
8
14
12
10
8
6
6
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Distance(m)
90
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Distance(m)
80
90
Experimental Investigation of Throughput Performance of IEEE 802.11g OFDM based Systems in a Campus Environment
431
40
40
35
week 1
week 2
week 1
week 2
30
Throughput(Mb/s)
Throughput(Mb/s)
35
30
25
20
25
20
15
15
10
10
5
10
5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Distance(m)
90
Distance(m)
week 1
week 2
45
35
40
30
35
Throughput(Mb/s)
Throughput(Mb/s)
40
25
20
15
week 1
week 2
30
25
20
15
10
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Distance(m)
90
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Distance(m)
Here, the data throughput performances at different periods of the day are presented graphically for comparison. For each week,
(throughput vs distance) for morning, afternoon, and evening periods were evaluated for comparison as displayed in figure 15 to 26. As can
be realized from the figures above, a relatively steady throughput performance can be observed at the different period of the day even as the
distance between the server and the Aps measurement location s increases. The steady throughput of 802.11g comes through two pathways.
Several features in 802.11g increase data rate in the physical layer, with some proportion of that effect visible in throughput steady
performance. 802.11g also includes innovations that reduce overhead and improve efficiency of transmissions directly contributing to
steady throughput. This is in addition to the fact earlier stressed, that the Wifi system with OFDM interface can effectively use multipath
component because of guard period incorporated in the system. 802.11g Wifi also includes innovations that reduce overhead and improve
efficiency of transmissions directly contributing to steady throughput.
432
week 1 (morning)
week 1 (afternoon)
week 1 (evening)
20
28
26
18
24
Signal Strenght(dBm)
Throughput(dBm)
16
14
12
10
22
week 2 (morning)
week 2 (afternoon)
week 2 (evening)
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Distance(m)
20
40
60
80
100
120
Distance(m)
25
30
week 3(morning)
week 3(afternoon)
week 3(evening)
25
Throughput(dBm)
Throughput(dBm)
20
15
10
week 4(morning)
week 4(afternoon)
week 4(evening)
20
15
10
20
40
60
80
100
120
20
40
60
80
100
120
Distance(m)
distance(m)
20
28
26
18
week 1 morning
week 1 afternoon
week 1 evening
22
Throughput(Mb/s)
Throughput(Mb/s)
16
24
14
12
10
week 2 (morning)
week 2 (afternoon)
week 2 (Evening)
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
0
20
40
60
80
100
Distance(m)
20
40
60
80
100
Distance(m)
Experimental Investigation of Throughput Performance of IEEE 802.11g OFDM based Systems in a Campus Environment
433
35
30
week 3 (morning)
week 3 (afternoon)
week 3 (evening)
30
25
Throughput(Mb/s)
Throughput(Mb/s)
25
20
15
10
week 4 morning
week 4 afternoon
week 4 evening
20
15
10
5
5
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
20
40
7.2
80
100
week 1(morning)
week 1(afternoon)
week 1(evening)
7.4
60
Distance(m)
Distance(m)
40
35
7.0
Throughput(Mb/s)
Throughput(Mb/s)
30
6.8
6.6
6.4
6.2
week 2(morning)
week 2(afternoon)
week 2(evening)
25
20
15
10
6.0
5.8
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
Distance(m)
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Distance(m)
week 1(morning)
week 1(afternoon)
week 1(evening)
9.5
45
9.0
40
8.0
Throughput(Mb/s)
Throughput(Mb/s)
8.5
7.5
7.0
6.5
6.0
week 2(morning)
week 2(afternoon)
week 2(evening)
35
30
25
20
5.5
15
5.0
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Distance(m)
Distance(m)
90
434
4.
Conclusion
In recent years, most Wireless Local Area Networks (WLAN) are based on the IEEE 802.11b, 802.11a, 802.11g or 802.11n standards.
These standards define how to wirelessly connect computers or devices to a network. Wireless enabled devices can send and receive data
anywhere within the range of a wireless access point. The choice of the Wireless LAN protocol depends on the requirements of the
individuals or a company who aims to implement the WLAN infrastructure. Some of the parameters that should be considered in selecting
an appropriate WLAN working protocol are data communications speed and range.
The main objective of this study was to carry out an experimental investigation of the impact of packet data communication link of WLAN
based OFMD systems in a campus environment. The results show that data throughput remains relatively stable even as the distance
between the access points and the user measurement location increases. The steady throughput may be attributed to the fact that the Wifi
system with OFDM interface can effectively use multipath component because of guard period incorporated in the system. The steady
throughput performance results may also come through two pathways. Several features in 802.11g increase data rate in the physical layer,
with some proportion of that effect visible in throughput steady performance. 802.11g also includes innovations that reduce overhead and
improve efficiency of transmissions directly contributing to steady throughput.
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
IEEE standard 802.11 Wireless Medium Access Control and Physical Layer Specifications 1999.
Hiertz, G. Denteneer, D. Stibor, L. Zang, Y. Costa, X.P. Walke, B., The IEEE 802.11 Universe IEEE Communications Magazine page 62-70,
January, 2010.
Ergen, M IEEE 802.11 TutorialUniversity of California Berkeley, June 2002
Henry, B. E. "Throughput Measurements and Empirical Prediction Models for IEEE 802.11b Wireless LAN (WLAN) Installations" M.Sc. thesis,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia, USA, 2001.
Rose, C. Ulukus, S, and Yates. R.D. "Wireless systems and interference avoidance". IEEE Transactions on wireless Communications, pp. 415-428,
2002.
Zahur, Y. Doctor, M. Davari, S. and Andrew Yang, T. "802.11b Performance Evaluation". Proceeding of the 2nd IASTED International Conference
Communications, Internet, and Information Technology, Scottsdale, AZ, USA, 2003.
Ngala, D. K (2012), Studying the Impact of the Environment on Radio Frequency Signal Quality, a case study of Knust Wireless Local Network, M.Sc.
Thesis, College of Engineering, Department of Telecommunication Engineering, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Ghana.