Theoretical modeling for performance analysis of IEEE 1901 power-line communication networks in the multi-hop environment

  • Sheng Hao
  • Hu-yin ZhangEmail author


As one of the most promising networking technologies, power-line communication (PLC) networks have been gradually used not only in home networking systems but also in industrial IoT (Internet of things). Current studies of PLC medium access control (MAC) protocol (i.e., IEEE 1901) only focus on the single-hop environment; however, in practical industrial IoT and home access communication systems, PLC networks generally utilize a multi-hop architecture. In addition, due to the difference in the MAC standard between 802 series and 1901, existing analytical models of multi-hop IEEE 802.11 wireless networks are not suitable for multi-hop IEEE 1901 PLC networks. In this paper, we propose a theoretical model for performance analysis of multi-hop IEEE 1901 PLC networks, where the impacts of traffic rate (containing relay traffic), buffer size, deferral counter process of 1901, hidden terminal problem and multi-hop environment are comprehensively considered. The modeling process is divided into two parts. In the local modeling part, we construct a brand-new Markov chain model to investigate the carrier sense multiple access with collision avoidance process of IEEE 1901 protocol under the multi-hop environment. In the coupling queueing modeling part, we employ queueing theory to analyze the packet transmission procedure between successive hops. On the basis, we derive the closed-form expressions of throughput, medium access delay, packet blocking probability, end-to-end successful transmission delay and goodput. Through extensive simulations, we verify that our theoretical model can accurately estimate the MAC performance of IEEE 1901 PLC networks in the multi-hop environment.


Power-line communication (PLC) IEEE 1901 MAC protocol Multi-hop environment CSMA/CA Performance analysis Markov chain Queueing theory 



The author would like to thank the editor and four anonymous reviewers for helpful comments that have improved the quality of the paper. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 61772386).


  1. 1.
    Homeplug alliance (2016). Accessed 12 June 2016
  2. 2.
    Faure JP, Allen JD et al (2010) IEEE standard for broadband over power line networks: medium access control and physical layer specifications. IEEE Std 1901–2010 10(2):1–1589Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhu N, Diethe T, Camplani M et al (2015) Bridging e-health and the internet of things: the sphere project. IEEE Intell Syst 30(4):39–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sayed M, Tsiftsis TA, Al-Dhahir N (2017) On the diversity of hybrid narrowband-plc/wireless communications for smart grids. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun 16(17):4344–4360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shlezinger N, Shaked R, Dabora R (2018) On the capacity of MIMO broadband power line communications channels. IEEE Trans Commun 66(10):4795–4810Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Artale G, Cataliotti A, Cosentino V, Cara DD, Giovanni T (2018) A new low cost power line communication solution for smart grid monitoring and management. IEEE Instrum Meas Mag 21(2):29–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vlachou C, Banchs A, Herzen J, Thiran P (2014) Performance analysis of MAC for power-line communications. In: SIGMETRICS 2014. ACM, Austin, TX, USA, 16–20 June 2014, pp 585–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vlachou C, Banchs A, Herzen J, Thiran P (2014) Analyzing and boosting the performance of power-line communication networks. In: Proceedings of the 10th International on Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, CoNEXT 2014. ACM, Sydney, Australia, 2–5 Dec 2014, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vlachou C, Banchs A, Herzen J, Thiran P (2014) On the MAC for power-line communications: modeling assumptions and performance tradeoffs. Semiotica 2007(166):97–104Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vlachou C, Banchs A, Salvador P (2016) Analysis and enhancement of CSMA/CA with deferral in power-line communications. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 34(7):1978–1991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vlachou C, Banchs A, Herzen J, Thiran P (2017) How CSMA/CA with deferral affects performance and dynamics in power-line communications. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 25(1):250–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hao S, Zhang HY (2019) From homogeneous to heterogeneous: an analytical model for IEEE 1901 power line communication networks in unsaturated conditions. IEICE Trans Commun E102–B(8):1636–1648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kang J, Kim Y, Kim K (2009) Hidden terminal of Korea Standard PLC protocol in access network. In: IEEE International Symposium on Power Line Communications and Its Applications 2009. IEEE, Dresden, Germany, 29 Mar–1 April 2009, pp 85–88Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dong LF, Shu YT, Chen HM, MA MD (2008) Packet delay analysis on IEEE 802.11 DCF under finite load traffic in multi-hop ad hoc networks. Sci China Ser F (Inf Sci) 51(4):408–416MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abreu T, Baynat B, Begin T, Guerin-Lassous I (2013) Hierarchical modeling of IEEE 802.11 multi-hop wireless networks. In: ACM International Conference on Modeling 2013. ACM, Barcelona, Spain, pp 143–150Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Abreu T, Baynat B, Begin T, Nguyen N (2014) Modeling of IEEE 802.11 multi-hop wireless chains with hidden nodes. In: ACM International Conference on Modeling 2014. ACM, QC, Canada, Sept 2014, pp 159–162Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Begin T, Baynat B, Abreu T (2016) Performance analysis of multi-hop flows in IEEE 802.11 networks. Perform Eval 96(C):12–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aydogdu C, Karasan E (2011) An analysis of IEEE 802.11 DCF and its application to energy-efficient relaying in multihop wireless networks. IEEE Trans Mobile Comput 10(10):1361–1373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Aydogdu C, Karasan E (2016) Goodput and throughput comparison of single-hop and multi-hop routing for IEEE 802.11 DCF-based wireless networks under hidden terminal existence. Wirel Commun Mobile Comput 16(9):1078–1094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kafaie S, Hossam AM, Chen Y, Dobre OA (2018) Performance analysis of network coding with IEEE 802.11 DCF in multi-hop wireless networks. IEEE Trans Mobile Comput 17(5):1148–1161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shahbaz R, Mohammed G, Ali M (2018) Throughput analysis of IEEE 802.11 multi-hop wireless networks with routing consideration: a general framework. IEEE Trans Commun 66(11):5430–5443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Qi W, Jaffres-Runser K, Xu Y et al (2017) TDMA versus CSMA/CA for wireless multi-hop communications: a stochastic worst-case delay analysis. IEEE Trans Ind Inform 13(2):877–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rahman D-M, Naderi YM, Chowdhury KR (2016) Performance analysis of CSMA/CA based medium access in full duplex wireless communications. IEEE Trans Mobile Comput 15(6):1457–1470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rosenkrantz WA, Simha R (1992) Some theorems on conditional Pasta: a stochastic integral approach. Oper Res Lett 11(3):173–177MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bolch G, Greiner S, De Meer H, Trivedi KS (1998) Queuing networks and Markov chains. Wiley, HobokenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Saloff-Coste L (1997) Lectures on finite Markov chains. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bagaa M, Chelli A, Djenouri D, Taleb T, Balasingham I, Kansanen K (2017) Optimal placement of relay nodes over limited positions in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun 16(4):2205–2219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bulusu S, Mehta N, Kalyanasundaram S (2018) Rate adaptation, scheduling, and mode selection in D2D systems with partial channel knowledge. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun 17(2):1053–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ComputerWuhan UniversityWuhanPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations