| Literature DB >> 34306586 |
Inam Ullah Khan1, Muhammad Abul Hassan2, Mohammad Dahman Alshehri3, Mohammed Abdulaziz Ikram4, Hasan J Alyamani5, Ryan Alturki6, Vinh Truong Hoang7.
Abstract
In recent decades, the Internet of flying networks has made significant progress. Several aerial vehicles communicate with one another to form flying ad hoc networks. Unmanned aerial vehicles perform a wide range of tasks that make life easier for humans. However, due to the high frequency of mobile flying vehicles, network problems such as packet loss, latency, and perhaps disrupted channel links arise, affecting data delivery. The use of UAV-enabled IoT in sports has changed the dynamics of tracking and working on player safety. WBAN can be merged with aerial vehicles to collect data regarding health and transfer it to a base station. Furthermore, the unbalanced energy usage of flying things will result in earlier mission failure and a rapid decline in network lifespan. This study describes the use of each UAV's residual energy level to ensure a high level of safety using an ant-based routing technique called AntHocNet. In health care, the use of IoT-assisted aerial vehicles would increase operational performance, surveillance, and automation optimization to provide a smart application of flying IoT. Apart from that, aerial vehicles can be used in remote communication for treatment, medical equipment distribution, and telementoring. While comparing routing algorithms, simulation findings indicate that the proposed ant-based routing protocol is optimal.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34306586 PMCID: PMC8270719 DOI: 10.1155/2021/1686946
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1Personalized UAV network applications in health care.
Multiple and single aerial vehicles.
| Feature | Single FANET-UAV network | Multiple FANET-UAV networks |
|---|---|---|
| Failure impact of network | Very high | Very low; other nodes replace the failed ones |
| Scalability | Limited | High |
| Survivability | Low | High |
| Speed of mission | Slow | Very fast |
| Cost | Medium | Low |
| Bandwidth | Needed | High |
| Communication medium | Antenna | Omni-directional |
| Control complexity | Low | High |
| Coordination on failure | Low | High |
Figure 2Single UAV monitoring-based applications.
Figure 3Multi-UAV's connectivity in two different cities.
Figure 4Routing protocols for Internet of flying networks.
Latest literature about routing protocols.
| Ref. | Routing protocol | Prediction | Connectivity | Exploration | Efficient use of energy | Rapid action against abrupt changes | Network application |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Energy-efficient Connectivity-aware Data Delivery (ECaD) routing algorithm | Available | Available | Available | Available | Not available | Flying ad hoc networks |
| [ | Parrot: predictive ad-hoc routing | Available | Not available | Available | Not available | Not available | UAV-aided networks |
| [ | ARdeep: adaptive and reliable routing protocol with deep learning | Available | Available | Available | Available | Not available | Mobile robot networks |
| [ | QMR | Available | Not available | Available | Available | Available | FANETs |
| [ | FLRLBR | Available | Available | Available | Available | Not available | FANETS |
| [ | QAGR | Available | Not available | Available | Not available | Not available | FANETs |
| [ | Adaptive Q-routing with Random Echo and Route Memory (AQRERM) | Available | Not available | Available | Not available | Not available | FANETs |
| [ | Delayed Q-routing (DQ-routing) | Available | Not available | Not available | Available | Not available | FANETs |
| [ | Poisson's probability-based Q-routing (PBQ-routing) | Available | Available | Available | Not available | Not available | FANETs |
| [ | Traffic-aware Q-network enhanced routing protocol based on GPSR (TQNGPSR) | Available | Available | Available | Not available | Not available | UAV-aided networks |
Figure 5Working of ant colony optimization.
Figure 6Flowchart of AntHocNet.
Figure 7Aerial network topology for UAVs.
Figure 8Throughput analysis.
Figure 9Packet delivery ratio.
Figure 10Packet drop count.
Figure 11Packet loss.
Figure 12Average end-to-end delay.
Network utilization analysis using boundless area model (kbps).
| Metrics | AntHocNet | AOMDV | DSDV | DSR | M-DART | ZRP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minimum | 728.3125 | 1081.656 | 797.1563 | 1608.344 | 720 | 720 |
| Maximum | 9311.75 | 4747.359 | 4019.438 | 6217.172 | 4431.688 | 1320 |
| Average | 9311.75 | 4747.359 | 4019.438 | 6217.172 | 4431.688 | 1320 |
| Standard deviation | 1260.94777 | 513.0735 | 405.4626 | 587.2945 | 638.467 | 129.4262 |