Hi Osama, If you're interested in modeling the 5.9 GHz DSRC band, the most comprehensive characterization I'm aware of can be found in [1]. The software in [2] is a patch for ns-2.35 that implements the model in [1]. For more background and a deeper study on VANET simulation, please refer to [3].
[1] L. Cheng, B. E. Henty, D. D. Stancil, F. Bai, and P. Mudalige, “Mobile Vehicle-to-Vehicle Narrow-Band Channel Measurement and Characterization of the 5.9 GHz Dedicated Short Range Communication (DSRC) Frequency Band”, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, Vol. 25, No. 8, October 2007. [2] http://masimum.inf.um.es/fjrm/development/lognormalnakagami6/ [3] Francisco J. Ros, Juan A. Martinez and Pedro M. Ruiz, “A Survey on Modeling and Simulation of Vehicular Networks: Communications, Mobility, and Tools”, Computer Communications, Vol. 43, pp. 1-15, May 2014. http://masimum.inf.um.es/fjrm/wp-uploads/Ros-COMCOM14.pdf Best, -- Francisco J. Ros, PhD Dept. of Information and Communications Engineering University of Murcia, Murcia (Spain) http://masimum.inf.um.es/fjrm/ El 26/07/2014, a las 15:00, Osama Rehman escribió: > > Hello, > > I am trying to evaluate the performance of a vehicular ad hoc network > (VANET) based protocol over Nakagami-m fading channel using ns-2 simulator. > I came across various recommended parameters, specially when it comes to > setting the "m" value for defining fading severity. Following are my > resources: > > *1) "An empirical model for probability of packet reception in vehicular ad > hoc networks", 2009, recommends a Nakagami-m = 3.* > > *2) "Broadcast reception rates and effects of priority access in > 802.11-based vehicular ad-hoc networks", 2004, recommends the following:* > > * Nakagami-m=3, if distance between vehicles are less than 50m.* > > * Nakagami-m=1, if distance between vehicles are more than 150m.* > > *Nakagami-m=1.5, if distance between vehicles are in between 50m & 150m.* > > *3) "IEEE 802.11-based one-hop broadcast communications: understanding > transmission success and failure under different radio propagation > environments", 2006, recommends Nakagami-m = 1, 3 and 5, while emphasizing > on m = 3.* > > *4) "A comparative analysis of DSRC and 802.11 over Vehicular Ad hoc > Networks", recommends two scenarios i.e. urban (m=1) and freeway (m=1.5).* > > I would like to hear opinion of the research community on which *Nakagami-m* > parameter is the most suitable for evaluating VANETs protocols over *"freeway > (highway) scenarios"*. I am also in search for the suitable corresponding > Nakagami-m fading parameters while using ns-2 simulation platform. > > Thanks, > Osama Rehman
