Overhead Analysis of AODV, TORA and AOMDV in MANET Using Various Energy Models

  • Manish Bhardwaj
  • Naresh Sharma
  • Monika Johri
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 131)


In this paper we have studied the energy overhead performance of three different routing protocols under three different energy models with some modification. The three different energy models considered are (a) Bansal Energy Model (b) Vaddina Energy Model and (c) Chandrakasan Energy Model. We apply these energy models to AODV, TORA and AOMDV routing protocols to determine the energy overhead among these three routing protocols by varying the transmission range. Our aim is to analyze how these routing protocols behave under different energy models. In the analysis of energy overhead the underlying mobility model also plays a very important role. We have selected the RWP-SS mobility model. In literature many research papers skip the initial simulation time while simulating the routing protocols but this particular mobility model enables us to calculate the energy overhead from the start of the simulation.


Energy Overhead Routing protocols Simulation Ad hoc networks AODV AOMDV TORA 


  1. 1.
    Feeney LM, Nilsson M (2001) Investigating the energy consumption of a wireless network interface in an ad hoc netwroking environmentGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Prabhakaran P, Sankar R (2006) Impact of realistic mobility models on wireless networks performance. IEEE international conference on wireless and mobile computing, networking and communications, Montreal, Canada, In, pp 329–334Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cano J-C, Manzoni P (2000) A performance comparison of energy consumption for mobile Ad hoc network routing protocols. In: Proceedings of the 8th international symposim on modeling, analysis and simulation of computer and telecommunication systems, IEEE Computer Society, Los AlamitosGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen B-R, Hwa Chang C (2003) Mobility impact on energy conservation of Ad hoc routing protocols. In: SSGRR 2003, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gupta AK (2010) Performance analysis of AODV, DSR and TORA routing protocols. IACSIT Int, J Eng Technol 2:2. ISSN:1793–8236Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Khatri P, Rajput M (2010) Performance study of Ad hoc reactive routing protocols. J Comput Sci 6:1159–1163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Perkins CE, Royer EM (2009) Ad hoc Networking, chapter Ad hoc On-demand distance vector routing. Addison Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Balakrishna R, Panduranga Rao MV, Shet KC (2008) Development of scheduler for real time and embedded system domain. In: IEEE AINA-2008 International conference, JAPAN.
  9. 9.
    Rahman Khan K, Rafi Zaman U, Venugopal Reddy A (2008) Performance comparison of on-demand and table driven Ad Hoc routing protocols using NCTUns. UKSIM: IEEE Tenth Int Conf Comput Model Simul 1(3):336–341Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mahmoud AE, Khalaf R, Kayssi A (2007) Performance comparison of the AODV and DSDV routing protocols in mobile Ad-hoc networks. LebanonGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ahmed A-M, Mohamed O-K (2006) Performance analysis of MANET routing protocols in the presence of self-similar traffic. In: Proceedings of the 31st IEEE conference on local computer networks. Boston, USA, ISSN-0742-1303Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANET) Working Group, Html, 2004
  13. 13.
    Perkins CE, Royer EM, Das SR (2002) Ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) routing. Internet Draft, draft- ietf- manet aodv-10.txt, work in progressGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Perkins CE, Royer EM (1999) Ad-hoc on-demand distance vector routing. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, pp 90–100Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bhatt S, Fujimoto R, Ogieski A, Permalla K (2002) Parallel simulation techniques for large scale networks. IEEE Comm Mag 98:42–47Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee A, Kaixin X (2004) GloMoSim Java Visualization Tool. Documentation version 1.1, Software DistributionGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    IEEE 802.11: part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) specification, Aug. 1999Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Information Sciences Institute, The Network Simulator Ns-2,
  19. 19.
    Stuart K, Tracy C, Michael C (2005) MANET simulation studies: the incredible. ACM Mobile Comput Comm Rev 9:4Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringSRM UniversityModinagarIndia

Personalised recommendations