Page 82 - sjsi

Research Article: Althalji et al 82

aware of the state of the parent node
connected to them. If it becomes out of radio
range, it will search for a new parent node .

Fig. 12: Delay vs num of fixed nodes
ARMOR [15] , the research proposed a new
parameter TTR to select the best parent node
that will stay the longest within the radio range.
TTR is calculated based on the node's speed and Fig. 14: Packet Delivery Ratio vs num of all nodes
position, and it is added to the DIO message. In (mobile and fixed)
this paper, a new timer was added to increase
The routing load of the ARMOR protocol
the rate of sending DIO messages by the fixed
increased because it modified the timer
node in order to introduce itself and to be algorithm for static nodes which made them
selected as the parent node by the mobile
send more control messages, so the mobile
nodes. The mobile nodes did not modify their nodes are aware and communicate with them .
timer, but this is not suitable for its neighbor
nodes to be aware of their current speed in case
it changes. The simulation was implemented
with an area of 10000^m2, 20 nodes(10 static
nodes and 10 mobile nodes) at a speed of 0.5 to
1.5m/s, and one root node. Another scenario
was with 40 nodes (20 static nodes and 20
mobile nodes).

Fig. 15: overhead vs num of all nodes (mobile and
fixed)

The proposed protocol did not increase the rate
of sending control messages (Figure 15), so it
was less routing load. It relied only on a
suggested control message sent by the mobile
node to its parent and child nodes when it
moves. The power consumption of the ARMOR
protocol is higher than the proposed protocol
(Figure 16) because it sends more control
Fig. 13: Power Consumption vs num of fixed nodes
messages
The simulation results showed that the packet
delivery rate of the proposed protocol is 10%
higher than ARMOR (Figure 14) because it
supports mobile nodes by making them directly

SJSI – 2023: VOLUME 1-1