| Literature DB >> 30223574 |
Zhenran Gao1, Weijing Li2, Yan Zhu3, Yongchao Tian4, Fangrong Pang5, Weixing Cao6, Jun Ni7.
Abstract
Wireless channel propagation characteristics and models are important to ensure the communication quality of wireless sensor networks in agriculture. Wireless channel attenuation experiments were carried out at different node antenna heights (0.8 m, 1.2 m, 1.6 m, and 2.0 m) in the tillering, jointing, and grain filling stages of rice fields. We studied the path loss variation trends at different transmission distances and analyzed the differences between estimated values and measured values of path loss in a free space model and a two-ray model. Regression analysis of measured path loss values was used to establish a one-slope log-distance model and propose a modified two-slope log-distance model. The attenuation speed in wireless channel propagation in rice fields intensified with rice developmental stage and the transmission range had monotone increases with changes in antenna height. The relative error (RE) of estimation in the free space model and the two-ray model under four heights ranged from 6.48⁻15.49% and 2.09⁻13.51%, respectively, and these two models were inadequate for estimating wireless channel path loss in rice fields. The ranges of estimated RE for the one-slope and modified two-slope log-distance models during the three rice developmental stages were 2.40⁻2.25% and 1.89⁻1.31%, respectively. The one-slope and modified two-slope log-distance model had better applicability for modeling of wireless channels in rice fields. The estimated RE values for the modified two-slope log-distance model were all less than 2%, which improved the performance of the one-slope log-distance model. This validates that the modified two-slope log-distance model had better applicability in a rice field environment than the other models. These data provide a basis for modeling of sensor network channels and construction of wireless sensor networks in rice fields. Our results will aid in the design of effective rice field WSNs and increase the transmission quality in rice field sensor networks.Entities:
Keywords: path loss; propagation characteristics; rice fields; two-slope logarithmic model
Year: 2018 PMID: 30223574 PMCID: PMC6163486 DOI: 10.3390/s18093116
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Experiment design of the three scenarios.
Figure 2Field experiment site map.
Figure 3Corresponding channel path loss at different antenna heights in the (A) tillering stage; (B) jointing stage; and (C) grain filling stage.
Figure 4Comparison chart of fitted values from the free space model and actual measured values at antenna heights of (A) 0.8 m; (B) 1.2 m; (C) 1.6 m; and (D) 2.0 m; LT: tillering stage; JT: jointing stage; EF: grain filling stage.
Figure 5Comparison chart of fitted values from the two-ray model and actual measured values at antenna heights of (A) 0.8 m; (B) 1.2 m; (C) 1.6 m; and (D) 2.0 m; LT: tillering stage; JT: jointing stage; EF: grain filling stage.
One-slope log-distance model regression parameters.
| Developmental Stage | Parameter | Path Loss Factor, | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.8 m | 1.2 m | 1.6 m | 2.0 m | 0.8 m | 1.2 m | 1.6 m | 2.0 m | |
| Tillering stage | −5.30 | −13.08 | −15.31 | −15.23 | 3.79 | 3.67 | 3.62 | 3.58 |
| Jointing stage | −4.94 | −13.59 | −12.92 | −11.78 | 3.93 | 3.79 | 3.75 | 3.65 |
| Grain filling stage | −4.89 | −15.91 | −12.07 | −9.86 | 4.19 | 3.93 | 3.84 | 3.66 |
Figure 6Comparison chart of fitted values from the one-slope log-distance model and actual measured values at antenna heights of (A) 0.8 m; (B) 1.2 m; (C) 1.6 m; and (D) 2.0 m; LT: tillering stage; JT: jointing stage; EF: grain filling stage.
Regression parameters of the modified two-slope log-distance model.
| Parameter, | Path Loss Factor, | Breakpoint Distances, | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.8 m | 1.2 m | 1.6 m | 2.0 m | 0.8 m | 1.2 m | 1.6 m | 2.0 m | 0.8 m | 1.2 m | 1.6 m | 2.0 m | ||
|
|
| −8.89 | −8.98 | −6.70 | −7.72 | 3.87 | 3.57 | 3.25 | 3.24 | 231 | 238 | 168 | 203 |
|
| −26.71 | −57.51 | −53.38 | −62.21 | 4.47 | 5.54 | 5.25 | 5.52 | |||||
|
|
| −12.78 | −0.94 | −3.36 | −3.36 | 3.47 | 3.00 | 3.14 | 3.09 | 189 | 154 | 112 | 98 |
|
| 2.67 | −10.14 | −16.45 | −29.48 | 4.26 | 3.80 | 3.91 | 4.30 | |||||
|
|
| −12.13 | −15.09 | −4.84 | −4.96 | 3.02 | 4.15 | 3.40 | 3.35 | 140 | 147 | 112 | 119 |
|
| 17.46 | −23.67 | −18.81 | -10.93 | 4.31 | 4.50 | 4.12 | 3.71 | |||||
Figure 7Comparison chart of fitted values from the modified two-slope log-distance model and actual measured values at antenna heights of (A) 0.8 m; (B) 1.2 m; (C) 1.6 m; and (D) 2.0 m; LT: tillering stage; JT: jointing stage; EF: grain filling stage.