You are in:Home/Publications/Lightweight routing protocol for low‐tension narrowband powerline systems

Dr. Ahmed Abdel Hamid Aly El-Awamry :: Publications:

Title:
Lightweight routing protocol for low‐tension narrowband powerline systems
Authors: Ahmed El-Awamry
Year: 2020
Keywords: Ad-hoc Networks, Powerline Communication, Smart Meter, AMR
Journal: Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Volume: Not Available
Issue: Not Available
Pages: Not Available
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Local/International: International
Paper Link:
Full paper Ahmed Abdel Hamid Aly El-Awamry_16945448_1.pdf
Supplementary materials Ahmed Abdel Hamid Aly El-Awamry_Graphical_Abstract.png
Abstract:

This article proposes a combination between source routing technique and on‐demand ad hoc routing algorithm to increase link reliability in power line communications over low‐tension power grid. The proposed methodology is an enhanced low‐complexity routing protocol for smart metering application (ELCSM). The algorithm considers data concentrator (DC) located directly after the low‐tension step‐down transformer. The data concentrator is polling the reachable meters connected to the power line and then it sends information about energy consumption, loading profile and any other crucial data to the utility through the cloud. The designed protocol minimizes the processing complexity at the meter's side, whereas most of the intelligence is shifted to the DC. The protocol takes into consideration the asymmetric characteristics of the power line channel, where some nodes could suffer from very bad downlink quality due to significant noise at the meter's side. These nodes that suffer from bad channel conditions and could not receive data sent from DC and/or other nodes are therefore classified as deaf nodes, although their transmission could be received properly by adjacent nodes. Moreover, unique lightweight packet structure is proposed to minimize algorithm overhead and to enhance the system robustness. The protocol performance is compared to LCSM and LOADng‐CTP in terms of protocol overhead, end‐to‐end delay, and packet delivery ratio.

Google ScholarAcdemia.eduResearch GateLinkedinFacebookTwitterGoogle PlusYoutubeWordpressInstagramMendeleyZoteroEvernoteORCIDScopus