VEHICULAR ADHOC NETWORK

(VANET)

Presented by:
Akanksha Kenge
Rutuja Gawande

1
 INDEX

• INTRODUCTION
• ARCHITECTURE
• CLUSTERING
• ROUTING PROTOCOLS
• RESULTS OF ROUTING
• CONCLUSION

2
 WHAT IS VANET?
• Technology in which Vehicles are equipped with short-range wireless
communication technology acting as computer nodes on the road.

Major Objectives :
• Broadcast warning messages to neighbouring vehicles in case of car
accidents.
• Help emergency vehicles to pass other vehicles quickly.
• Provide drivers with latest real-time traffic information.
• Assist drivers to find accessible parking space

3
INTRODUCTION
Wireless Adhoc Network:
Self –configuring dynamic networks.
Each node participate in routing by forwarding the data to
other nodes.
Each node is free to move.
Don’t rely on pre-existing infrastructure .

Types of Wireless adhoc Network:

• MANET
• VANET
• FANET

4
Types of Communication:

• Vehicle to Vehicle communication

• Vehicle to Infrastructure communication

5
 VANET Architecture
Basic components are:
• On Board Unit(OBU)
• Road side unit(RSU)
• Trusted Authority
• Application unit(AU)

6
 Wave Architecture of VANET

IEEE 802.11p –standard which provides vehicular safety communication

through wireless network.
IEEE 1609 –Higher layer standard based on 8092.11p

Layers in Architecture:
A. Physical and Mac layer
B. Multichannel operation layer
C. Network and Transport Layer
D. Resource Layer
E. Security services 7
Dedicated Short Range Communiaction:
Used in V2V and V2I communication.
Uses IEEE 802.11p protocol for communication.

V2V Architecture Model : implement information sharing and data communication

between vehicles

Disadvantage: Vehicle nodes have uneven distribution and continually changing network
topology.

V2I Architecture Model: It uses the third-generation cellular system UMTS which is a
fixed infrastructure and can provide long-distance effective data transmission.

Disadvantage: Using fourth generation cellular system LTE can cause great waste of
network bandwidth.

8
HYBRID Architectural Model:
• combines the advantages of a lower network overhead and flexible deployment of V2V
• The number of handshakes between the vehicles and base station are reduced and
overhead is effectively dropped.
• Improves the performance of the network

Disadvantage: requires high level of stability and high reliability.

.
9
Clustering :

Single Hop Clustering : allows the distance between cluster members and the
cluster head to be 1-hop,which does not show good performance affected by
dynamic change of topology in VANET .

Multi Hop Clustering : allows the distance between cluster members and the
cluster head to be N-hop, which can effectively expand the cluster coverage

Multi hop Clustering Architecture Model

10
 Routing Protocols used in VANET

• Topology Based Protocols

• Position Based protocols
• Cluster Based Protocols
• Geo-cast Routing Protocols

• The most widely used protocol now a days is the

position based protocol.

11
 Position Based Protocol
• Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR): is a routing protocol for
wireless datagram networks which uses the positions of routers and a
packet’s destination to make the forwarding decisions.
• Greedy Perimeter Coordinate Routing (GPCR): does not use all the must
pass packet intersections and street map information until it reaches its
destination without prediction
• Predictive Directional Greedy Routing (PDGR): relies on the position,
direction, and the speed of each neighbor to select the next node to
forward the information
• Predictive Geographic Routing (PGRP): is the latest routing protocol with
the digital map, which improve the performance of routing by considering
the mobility constraints and predictive nature of vehicles

12
 MPBRP: MOBILITY PREDICTION BASED ROUTING
PROTOCOL

• MPBRP can be a solution to deal with the problem of

dynamic changeable topology and variable velocities in
vehicular communication
• By the positioning systems and V2V communication, MPBRP
can collect the other vehicles’ kinematic information, such as
position, velocity, acceleration and drivers’ intention.
• In the greedy forwarding algorithm, if the sender detects the
nodes within the transmission range, but none of them is
closer to the destination, the packet cannot be transferred to
the destination. Finally, the packet can be sent to the
destination by the route A->C->D->E->G->H->Z.

13
 Fig a: Perimeter Forwarding Strategy

• By the predictive forwarding strategy, the new topology will be used by

source node A. And node A can deliver the packet by the route A->B-
>D->E->F->H->Z.
• Inside the MPBRP, two position information should be calculated for
the source, such as, the distance from the neighbor node to the
destination and the angle of the neighbor in relation to the destination.

14
Fig b : Predictive Forwarding Strategy

Fig c : Real image of Vehicles Communicating

15
Performance Metrics based on Quality of
Services in VANETs
1. End-to-End Delay (E2E Delay): The Veins simulator
allows the dynamic mobility. By predicting the position of
each vehicle in the short future, some problems can be
overcome, for example, being out of bound.
2. Packet Delivery Ratio: The percentage of the packet
which can be sent from the source node to destination
node successfully. Average
3. Average Hops: The average number of hops from the
source node to the destination node.

16
Results Obtained: The proposed MPBRP
achieved better results on PDR, E2E delay
and Average hop, because it integrates the
advantages of GPSR, GPCR, PDGR and PGRP.

Fig a: Packet delivery ratio in the Grid-based Simulation

17
 b
Fig b: End-To-End Delay in Grid-based
Simulation

18
Fig c: Average hop in the Grid-based
Simulation

19
 Conclusion and Future Scope
• Relative to existing similar routing protocols, the developed MPBRP
achieved better performance by avoiding the local maximum, selecting
the best next-hop node and checking the connectivity to the destination.
Two enhanced forwarding strategies support the MPBRP and this
improved the packet delivery ratio, overcame end-to-end delay and
reduced the average hop
• Furthermore, Software Defined Network (SDN) technology can be
potentially combined with the proposed MPBRP to achieve better
performance.

20