Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 9

1

A Portable and Multi-purpose D2D Test Bench


Implementation
Vibhutesh Kumar Singh, Hardik Chawla, and Vivek Ashok Bohara

This paper describes the design and


implementation of a prototype Device-to-Device (D2D)
communication test bench, which utilizes low cost and low
power wireless hardware to communicate with each other
& base station. The performance of the test bench has been
validated by emulating a base station and various D2D
enabled devices under the coverage area of BTS, so that
effective communication range and various cell and device
data parameters could be found out. All the emulation has
been done on our own developed low powered prototype.
Abstract

Index Terms cc2500, D2D, device-to-device, prototype, test


bench, wireless

I. INTRODUCTION

very natural calamity reminds us of our heavy dependence


on infrastructure for information dissemination and the
lack of easily deployable low cost emergency communication
services. In a typical natural calamity such as earthquakes,
floods and Tsunamis, communication services are plagued by
last mile connectivity issues and destruction of cellular
infrastructure such as Base Stations, Mobile Switching Centre
etc., as was evident during the Nepal earthquake in 2015 [2].
Even if these remain functional they are hogged by the acute
demand of data and voice traffic during the time of disaster. It
has been observed that although most of the disaster survivors
had access to mobile communication devices; however, they
were rendered useless due to destruction of cellular
infrastructure. This motivates the use of a cellular service that
is minimally dependent on network infrastructure. This is one
of the countless scenarios where D2D communication can be
useful [3]. In a typical D2D communication, the user which
are within the specialized D2D range in a cellular network set

This paragraph of the first footnote will contain the date on which you
submitted your paper for review. It will also contain support information,
including sponsor and financial support acknowledgment. For example, This
work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Commerce under Grant
BS123456.
The next few paragraphs should contain the authors current affiliations,
including current address and e-mail. For example, F. A. Author is with the
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Boulder, CO 80305 USA (email: author@ boulder.nist.gov).
S. B. Author, Jr., was with Rice University, Houston, TX 77005 USA. He
is now with the Department of Physics, Colorado State University, Fort
Collins, CO 80523 USA (e-mail: author@lamar.colostate.edu).
T. C. Author is with the Electrical Engineering Department, University of
Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309 USA, on leave from the National Research
Institute for Metals, Tsukuba, Japan (e-mail: author@nrim.go.jp).

up a direct radio link instead communicating with each other


through a base station. D2D communication is generally
opaque to the Base Station and it can occur either in the inband i.e., the data and control signals are transmitted with the
same channel which is allocated to cellular users too, or outof-band wherein the control signals and data are transmitted
with a channel separate from that is reserved for cellular user.
The user devices exchange data directly through the D2D link
circumventing the Base Station. Consequently, it can achieve
high data rate, low delay, and is low power consuming and
more spectrally efficient as compared to conventional cellular
services. D2D also aids by reducing the load on the network
and also provides robustness against infrastructure failures [4].
D2D communications can further increase the spectral and
energy efficiency by taking advantage of the proximity to
other devices by using a relay mode of communication [1].
Inclusion of mobile relays and relay assisted D2D
communications can enhance the achievable transmission
capacity, and also improve the coverage of networks [5]. In
case of emergency scenarios one of the primary concerns is to
get the message to a far-away destination. Here, the relay
transmission will be handy as it can enhance the coverage area
manifold.
In this work we have designed & developed a simple, low
cost, readily deployable D2D communication prototype. The
implemented D2D test bench includes a portable Base Station
and duplex transceivers which are capable of acting as relays
when required. The portability of this system enables it to be
readily deployed in an area to provide immediate access to
communication services. The devices are battery powered and
their low power consumption facilitates the use of light
portable batteries. The wireless network has been
implemented using embedded IEEE802.15.4 standard device
[6] and 2.4 GHz RF Transceivers (CC2500) [7] known for
their sparse energy consumption.
Fig.1. & Fig.2. shows two generic cellular scenarios in
which D2D communication will be useful. As in the case of
typical cellular infrastructure, in the proposed illustration as
well we assume that the control signals responsible for,
connection establishment, synchronization, resource allocation
& resource release, are assigned by base station only. For a
general D2D scenario, control signaling is usually routed
through BTS whereas subsequent voice/data communication
happens between two devices (cellular or mobile phones), all
the data required will be directly transmitted through one end
device to another.
Fig.1. illustrates the most general D2D scenario in which
two D2D enabled devices are inside a cell; however, they are

Fig. 1. A Typical D2D Communication Scenario, Without Relay


in close proximity to each other and hence they do no need
relay assistance, they can be designated as a D2D pair. In this
case the Base Station will allocate the channel resource on
request, to this pair so that they could start communicating.

Fig. 2. A Typical D2D Communication Scenario, With a Relay


Fig. 2. illustrates the scenario when two D2D enabled device
are inside a cell but can't directly communicate as D2D pair
(due to distance, unfavorable channel conditions etc.). In this
case the Base Station will request another node to act as a
relay, which will relay the data from one device to another.

Fig. 4. Data forwarding to multiple device at Cellular Boundary


Fig. 3. and Fig .3. shows scenarios in which the data coming
from base station is being forwarded to the desired device &
data from the base station is broadcasted to the devices
respectively. Fig. 3. particularly shows a test case in which
base station decides that the data instead of sending it directly
to the user far away from it (say it was near the cell boundary)
will be relayed through the device in proximity to both the
base station & the end device. Benefit of using this technique
is that the user at the cellular boundary gets required SNR
(Signal to Noise Ratio), with the help of another user acting as
a relay, for which the base station has to originally transmit
with much greater transmit power. Fig. 4. depicts a test case in
which the base station knows that the data requested by many
nodes are same (like they want to stream the same video
content), so instead of dedicating a separate channel for each
of the devices, it will assign a D2D user to forward data to
their proximity devices by allocating it a channel resource.
Main benefit of this way is that, it introduces network offloading effect & it particularly effective when the network
experiences a congestion.
The rest of this paper is as follows, Section II briefly
summarizes the previous implementations for D2D
communication. Section III describes the technical
specifications of the hardware and software used in the
implementation. In Section IV presents the description of the
experimental setup of our test bench which was tested in a
realistic environment. Section V discusses the various
probable communication scenarios/ test cases where our
implementation can be used. Finally, Section VI concludes the
paper.
II. RELATED WORK AND COMPARISON
In this section, we briefly summarize the previous hardware
implementation for D2D communication. Although there has
been significant research on simulation and theoretical
concepts of D2D related problems of device discovery, device
association, synchronization, mode selection, power control,
interference, resource allocation, & optimization, but the
practical implementations are still sparse. One of the initial

Fig. 3. Data forwarding to a device at Cellular Boundary

3
implementation for D2D communication is the FlashLinQ by
[8], which utilizes the licensed spectrum band. The system
was implemented on the FPGA board (Xilinx Vertex-4),
alongside DSP Chip, TI TMSC64x. Through the experimental
results they demonstrated, various concepts of D2D
communication. By using the licensed spectrum they have
successfully avoided the overcrowded scenario of ISM bands,
which automatically reduces the interference from successive
frequency bands. Our implementation is also being in ISM
however care was taken that no ISM band device was
operating in the vicinity so as to get accurate results. Other
already existing implementation includes [9], in which a testbench has been developed using DSP board, TI
TMS320C6670/6678, using the same platform they have
implemented the user equipment (UE) & evolved NodeB
(eNB). Additionally they have incorporated 3 D2D service in
that, i.e., Open Discovery, Restricted discovery &
Communication capability, which our developed prototype is
also capable of.
Another D2D test-bed implementation & testing was done
by [10]. In this work they have utilized w-iLab.t testbed of
iMinds in Zwijnaarde, where each of their node is powered
with Intel Atom D510 dual-core processor with a clock rate of
1.66GHz & 4Gb of RAM. They have used WiFi to transmit
the data. Our hardware implementation is rather lightweight,
portable & compact, by using only Arduino UNO for UE & a
Serial communication capable Mini Computer. Another FPGA
implementation includes [4] which uses WARP Board which
is powered by Xilinx Virtex-4 FPGA chip, & uses IEEE
802.15.4 protocol for wireless communication. Similar WARP
board implementation is described in [11] & [12]. [13] uses
WiFi in adhoc mode to interconnect the devices. Additionally,
in [14], they incorporate hybrid Mobile Adhoc Network &
Delay / Disruptive Tolerant Networking (MANET/DTN)
routing techniques & tested it on over 30 smartphones.
One of the implementation [15] uses the Wi-Fi direct links
of the android devices. This increases the power consumption.
Similar WiFi based implementation is used in [16], using
Nokia N800 Internet Tablets. They have tuned the
transmission power to 10mW, which restricts the range of the
communication till 35m. Furthermore to emulate the
infrastructure mode they have created the access point using
Wireless Routers. Another WiFi Direct implementation is
[17], by secure key establishment technique.
The USRP based implementation includes [18]. In this
work the baseband processing Application was implemented
in C++ & running in the PC with has the OS Ubuntu.
III. HARDWARE & SOFTWARE SETUP
In this section important details about the hardware and
software components have been covered, which we have used
to build our D2D communication device prototype.
A. CC2500 Based Wireless Transceiver
We have used separate transceiver for a base-station & a
different one for D2D communication. The transceiver
responsible for D2D communication is based on CC2500 chip
[7], a low cost transceiver working in the ISM band of 2.4GHz

& used in short range Device. Due to its, Wake-On-Radio


(WOR) functionality for automatic low-power receive polling;
the radio periodically wakes up to check if a valid signal is
being transmitted, if not found a valid Radio Frequency
preamble, it goes again in sleep state [7]. Due to this, its better
fits our low power constraint implementation. The digital
channel bandwidth is also user programmable and thus gives
capability to make it further flexible. All these qualities have
led us to make CC2500 based transceiver, for D2D
communication in our implementation.
For our implementation we have used a data rate of
57.6kBaud with Minimum Shift Keying (MSK), and 540 kHz
digital channel bandwidth. Forward Error Correction (FEC)
Coding is enabled to reduce the packet errors.
B. Zigbee Protocol Based Wireless Transceiver
The ZigBee standard operates on the IEEE 802.15.4
physical radio specification and operates in unlicensed bands
[6]. ZigBee protocol based transceiver can be configured to
have a low duty cycle, thus greatly reduces the power
consumption, which in return provides a long battery life. It
uses CSMA (Carrier Sense Multiple Access) Collision
avoidance technique with retries and acknowledgements for
channel access [6].
In our test bed implementation, we have used Channel
Number 25 which has a centre frequency 2.475 GHz and has
an SC Mask 0x4000 [6], including the Offset-Quadrature
Phase Shift Keying (O-QPSK) modulation scheme. By using a
channel of centre frequency of 2.475GHz we have ensured
that the data transmission is unaffected by interference from
external signal sources especially Wi-Fi [19]. And also it lies
out-band to our selected D2D frequencies hence ensuring no
interference, between the control signalling of Base Station &
the D2D communication.
C. Atmega328p Based Microcontroller Development Board
The Arduino Uno is a microcontroller board based on the
ATmega328 [20]. The Atmega328, a high-performance Atmel
8-bit AVR RISC-based microcontroller. This board is widely
available. For our implementation of D2D devices, it supports
enough features [20] and, it led us to decide on using it.
D. Software for Connection Setup and Device Control
Base Station has been modelled using a Serial
Communication Enabled Software like [21] and
hyperterminal. Base Stations configuration setup, requires
baud rate, number of data bits in a packet, parity bits, stop bits
and flow control mechanism. The connection setup and
communication parameters instructed by the Base Station are
to be adhered by the end and relay devices to be able to
communicate. This ensures that devices which might be
following different protocols or which might be having
different communication parameters are not allowed to
communicate within the network. Ensuring this automatically
incorporates the concept of network authorization in our D2D
devices and network.

4
E. Software for Network Testing, Configuration and Control
X-CTU software [21], has been used for configuration of the
Zigbee Transceivers [6]. Also, this software is used by us for
cellular range test analysis, through RSSI and packet drop
count.
The
standard
packet
content
was,
0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNO,
in
our
experiments, 32 Bytes in size. Whenever the packet received
has some characters different from the original one, we
conclude it to be a packet transmission failure.
Whole process of calculating the packet drop count out of
50 packets is shown in the Figure 4. Here the test packet is
first formed and then transmitted. After receiving the packet,
the receiver retransmits it towards the sender. The sender then
checks the received packet for errors, by comparing it with the
original transmitted version. If any mismatch is detected then,
it has to be counted as a packet drop. The same process is
repeated for each packet transmitted during our test bed
experiments.

Fig. 5. Flowgraph, illustrating the packet drop count is obtained


from 50 transmitted packets

IV. PACKET SPECIFICATIONS

Start
1 bit
Start
1 bit

To
4 bits

From
4 bits
Data
8 bits

Parity
1 bit

Stop
2 bits

Parity
1 bit

Stop
2 bits

Time
Slot
1
Time
Slot
2

Fig. 6. Representation of Data frame for D2D Communication

Fig .6. depicts the data frame for D2D communication for
our test bed. In the proposed transmission scheme the frame
will be transmitted in two time slots. The first time slot of the
frame is explicitly reserved for addressing the devices who are
sending and receiving. The second time slot is reserved for
data transmission. Due to this scheme the effective data rate
gets halved; but as the BAUD rate of Serial Communication
become high, it become less severe. This addressing scheme
will also be useful in case of relay communication as it aids in
routing the data efficiently. For additional error checking we
have also enabled the parity bit. Due to the small scale of
implementation the addressing scheme limits the system
capacity to a maximum of 16 (24) devices in a cell, due to 4bit addressing.
V. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
This section describes our experimental setup, which we have
used for its performance/range analysis. Our D2D prototype
was tested in an open field at IIIT Delhi campus wherein Line
of Sight (LOS) communication was ensured. D2D devices are
made using Arduino board [22] connected with Zigbee [6] and
CC2500 [7] based transceiver. The Base Station is modelled
using a computer system connected with Zigbee transceiver.
The control signalling & synchronisation is done by Base
Station. The devices uses CC2500 based transceiver to
communicate with each other & Zigbee for communicating
with Base Station.
Experiments was carried out using three end devices which
were capable of acting as relay as and when required and a
base station. The base station decides the following on basis of
RSSI information:
(a) Whether D2D should happen
(b) If (a) is true, then whether it should take place through
direct link or through relay.
To test the Base Station to Device link we have transmitted
50 packets for various possible distances and we have
recorded the RSSI for each packet received. Device-to-Device
link was tested by transmitting 20 packets at various possible
distances and packet drop count was measured to determine
the threshold distance for communication.
A. Setup 1: D2D Communication, Without Relay Device
In this, we have used a base station for control & two
duplex devices for emulating a general D2D communication
scenario. This scenario is also depicted in Figure 1. Base
station through RSSI value analysis of packets last received,
estimates the distance between itself and the all nodes, and
thus is aware about the radial distance of the devices. To start
the communication process, one of the two device will request
the base station to allow a connection to other device which is
in the same cell. The base station based on the previous
localization information of the device inside the cell will
decide whether its going to be a normal cellular
Communication (data being relayed through base station) or a
direct D2D communication.
Once acknowledged, receiving device will be instructed by
Base Station to be in receiving mode & transmitting device
will be instructed to start the transmission. Both will send a

5
data transfer completion notification to base station & the
connection will be closed so to release the allocated resource.
The communication process described above, is also being
depicted through the flow graph below (Fig. 7.)

the communication will happen through base station, else it


will be through relay device. The data packets will first arrive
at the relay & then forwarded to the destination. Both
transmitting and receiving device send a data transfer success
notification to base station and the connection will be closed.
We have also implemented a frequency hop, in the relay
device for this scenario, so that the effect of cross talk could
be reduced (due to the broadcasting nature of wireless
medium). All the communication happening in the network
while a connection is being created & going on, is depicted in
the flowgraph Fig. 8.

C. Setup 3: Data Forwarding To User Near Cell Boundary

Fig. 7. Communication between devices during direct D2D


communication

B. Setup 2: D2D Communication, With Relay Device


In this setup, have used a base station for control signaling,
two duplex devices and one relay device. Although all the
devices are also capable for acting as a relay. The base station,
through previous RSSI values of packets from devices, can
estimate their location inside the cell. This communication
scenario is also represented in Figure 2. Now to start the
process, one of the device will request the base station to
allow a connection to other device, within the cell.

This setup depicts a typical benefit of D2D relaying for a


cellular network. In this base station will do control signalling
to the device as well as to relay. Through RSSI value of the
devices, Base Station knows that data requesting device is
nearby the cellular boundary [24], thus to maintain a certain
SNR (Signal to Noise) requirement, it has to transmit with
considerably high power, which in turn will also increase the
interference to the non-orthogonal communication bands [23].
This problem can be suitably solved, by identifying a relay in
proximity to that device, to which the base station can send the
data at low power levels which in next step will forward to the
end device, while maintaining the SNR. All the
communication happening in the network, is depicted in the
flowgraph Fig .9, and also is diagrammatically represented in
Fig .3.

Fig. 9. Communication between devices during data forwarding

D. Setup 3: Data Multicasting to Users Nearby

Fig. 8. Communication between devices relay based D2D


communication

The base station based on the previous RSSI information,


infers that the requesting devices are out of range for a
practical D2D communication [24]. Apart from this, base
station also knows that there is another device in proximity,
capable of acting as a relay to both the devices who have made
connection request. Base station will enquire the forthcoming
relay device, about its state. If the answer is a busy state, then

This setup depicts another benefit of D2D relaying for a


cellular network. In this mode base station will do control
signalling to all the device. Through RSSI value of the
devices, Base Station could predict, that a group of devices are
in proximity [24] & are requesting same data e.g., streaming
the same news information. In this scenario, a normal cellular
communication approach would be to dedicate a separate data
channel for each device. But by applying D2D communication
relay, it will save a lot of Base Station resources. Now, it can
dedicate only one channel resource to one of the device in that
group, and that device will multicast that data to other devices
in its proximity, after getting the data from the base station.

Fig. 10. Variation of Packet Efficiency with RSSI for base station

This mode is most suitable to offload the network &


particularly helpful in avoiding congestion.

Zigbee protocol, we have transmitted 50 packets from various


possible distances and have accounted the RSSI value of each
packet, which gives us an estimate of the communication
range & efficiency of the link.

A. RSSI vs Distance Plot

Fig. 11. Communication between devices during data multicasting

Above process start with multiple devices requesting a


certain data from the network. The base station dont have
much channel resources to dedicate towards each device,
instead it has channels to allocate to the group of device so
that they could multicast the data within their group. So, in
place of a direct data delivery to every device the base station
will choose a device, who will multicast the data to every
other device in proximity who require that data. The process is
depicted in Fig .10. and also represented in Fig .4.
VI. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
This section describes results & analysis part that we have
used to develop our D2D communication test bed.
To test the Base Station to Device link which is based on

Here we have transmitted 50 data packets at various


distances. The packet structure is the same as described in
Section 3.2.1 and in addition to the whole process is depicted
in Figure 3 we have also saved the RSSI value of each
received packet for further analysis. The average RSSI of 50
packets at each distance was also calculated and plotted
(Figure 10). The data rate was maintained at 115.2kbps which
is sufficient for message signals and voice data as well.
The conclusions could be made out from Figure 10:
(a) As the distance is increasing between the base station &
the device, the RSSI value is decreasing, both in terms of
absolute value as well as in average. This is due to the path
loss of the wireless signal.
(b) The variance of the RSSI of received packets, is also
increasing with the increase of the distance between the Base
station and the device, this could be attributed to the fact that
as the distance in increasing the SNR value is decreasing (as
the received signal power value is also decreasing).
(c) Even if the device is near to base station, as it could be
seen in Figure 10, at some point (for 12 m distance) we can
see a high variance of the packets RSSI. This could be
attributed to the fact of random event occurring in a real world
scenario, like crossing of a vehicle etc., which could interfere
with the signal.

B. Intra-Cellular Localization Using RSSI


The RSSI value is used to estimate the approximate distance
between the base station and the end device within a cell.
Based on this model, the base station will also be able to
predict that there is a possibility of D2D communication
between different devices in a cell by setting a threshold

7
difference between the two devices requesting for
communication. The RSSI based localization [24] is an
established method to localize various objects within a locality
which could be accurately used to estimate the radial distance
from the subject.
C. Estimating Cellular Parameters
From Fig .11. below, it is conclusive, that if the received
average RSSI of the packets is above a particular threshold
then there would be virtually no packet drop (<15%) & the
efficiency of the communication will be nearly >85 %. But as
the average RSSI value decreases, there increase the chance of
packet drop, this is in corollary of the Distance vs Efficiency
data plot in Fig .12. and experimental work in [25].

The radius of the cell is 120m and one Base Station can cater
to an area of about 0.045km2. The range can be extended to a
radius of more than 1km by using power amplifiers. The
circular symmetry structure of the cell is concluded through
the radiation pattern of the whip antenna [6] which the Zigbee
series 2 module uses.

Fig. 13. Model Cell Parameters on the basis of experimental results

Fig. 11. Variation of Packet Efficiency with RSSI for base station

D. D2D Communication Specific Experimental Analysis


We measured the efficiency for D2D communication link with
and without the relay device. The threshold for Efficiency was
set to 90% for D2D communication and was used to define
communication range, which comes out to be 30m, as shown
in Fig .14.

# Efficiency is (Number of packets received correctly/


Number of packets transmitted)*100
*total packet transmitted per sample distance = 50.
The significance of Figure 12, is that it helps us to decide at
what distance we need to take a threshold for estimating the
cellular radius. And thus is helpful in deciding about other
cellular parameters too. From the data collected we have
observed that our Base Station has a range of about 120m, by
setting an Efficiency threshold of 85 %.

Fig. 14. Variation of Efficiency with Distance - D2D Communication

Fig. 12. Variation of Packet Efficiency with Distance for base station

Additionally Fig .13., shows the concept cell developed on the


basis of the above measurements.

Now, we have incorporated a relay between two devices.


The distance was varied for both the devices, taking relay
device as reference point and it was found that the range was
extended slightly more than twice of the range in previous
case i.e., without relay. We also observed that there is a
steeper drop in packet efficiency in the test case without relay
as compared to the case in which the relay was used. By the
plot of Efficiency of packet vs distance (Fig .15.) we conclude
that the D2D maximum range with a relay device is 62 m,
with the efficiency threshold being set to 90%.

8
increase of the device communication requirements as a
disaster strikes or we can emulate a random communication
scenario. The work can also be extended by using High
performing hardware and various high performing, complex
algorithms, could be implemented on them. We could also
implement it through Software Defined Radio platforms like
USRPs. Furthermore the concepts like Network Coding,
Power Saving & Cognitive radio can also be applied on this
prototype as an effective extension of this work.
IX. CONCLUSIONS
Fig. 15. Variation of Packet Efficiency with Distance for base station

# Efficiency is (Number of packets received correctly/


Number of packets transmitted)*100
*total packet transmitted per sample distance = 20.
E. D2D Device Specific Analysis

D2D communication could provide an effective network


offloading & when the disaster strikes it could prove as a boon
in the affected area. The network could then save a lot in terms
of power & resources which will be needed by it for a long
during a disaster. The various analysis done, also helped us to
determine various cellular & D2D parameters for our
developed prototype, which could be considered while

Table 1: Current and power consumption in the various modes of


D2D device

Table 1., shows the current and power consumption of the


various modules used for building the D2D devices and
combined current and power consumption of them in
active/inactive modes. Active mode is when the device is
communicating through a D2D link. Inactive mode is when
the device is not communicating but paired with Base Station.
The current rating is measured by a high resolution
Multimeter. The power consumption rating is obtained by
multiplying the current consumption with the operating
voltage of device. The active time and standby time have been
calculated by taking a standard 5.3Wh battery as reference.
VII. APPLICATIONS
Applications of D2D communication are many, but we
have developed the prototype by keeping in view the disaster
mitigation. During a disaster the network infrastructure fails or
easily become congested because people just want to know
about the well-being of each other. They also try to convey
and get the warning to their peers about potential unsafe
places. Mostly this happens within a cell. Our implementation
is an emulation for that scenario & in which D2D
communication effectively offloads the network & preserve
resources for other communication to happen.
Also while communicating through any wireless medium
the device is consuming the power. But with a place that has
been stricken with a disaster, it is obvious that the power
distribution will suffer. Thus the D2D enabled device should
also consume very less power, so while developing the test
bed we have taken care of the power consumption of every
module that we have integrated.
VIII. FUTURE WORK
The D2D test bed, we have built for emulation of various
communication scenarios in D2D communication, within a
cell can be easily extended by creating more number of
devices. In that extended implementation we could be able to
see a real world effect on the network as there is a manifold

Current
Consumption
(Individual
Devices)
Current
Consumption(With
D2D Feature Off)
Power
Consumption
(D2D Feature ON)
Power
Consumption(With
D2D Feature Off)
(D2D Feature
OFF)
Active time(With
5.3Wh 3.6V
Battery) (D2D
Feature ON)
Standby-time(With
5.3Wh 3.6V
Battery) (D2D
Feature Off)

Arduino
UNO
34mA

XBeeS2
31mA

2 RF
Links
42mA

34mA

31mA

OFF

122.4mW

111.6mW

151.2mW

122.4mW

111.6mW

OFF

Total
107mA

65mA

385.2mW

234mW

13.75hr

22.64hr

deploying an actual real world system.


REFERENCES
[1]. Wang, Bin, Li Chen, Xiaohang Chen, Xin Zhang, and Dacheng Yang.
"Resource allocation optimization for device-to-device communication
underlaying cellular networks." In Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC
Spring), 2011 IEEE 73rd, pp. 1-6. IEEE, 2011.
[2]. Goda, K., T. Kiyota, R. Pokhrel, G. Chiaro, T. Katagiri, K. Sharma, and
S. Wilkinson. "The 2015 gorkha nepal earthquake: insights from earthquake
damage survey." Front. Built Environ 1, no. 8 (2015).
[3]. Babun, Leonardo. "Extended Coverage for Public Safety and Critical
Communications Using Multi-hop and D2D Communications." (2015).
[4]. Hakola, Sami, Tao Chen, Janne Lehtomki, and Timo Koskela. "Deviceto-device (D2D) communication in cellular network-performance analysis of
optimum and practical communication mode selection." In Wireless
Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), 2010 IEEE, pp. 1-6.
IEEE, 2010.

9
[5]. Amate, Ahmed Mohammed. Device-to-Device Communication and
Multihop Transmission for Future Cellular Networks. Diss. University of
Hertfordshire, 2014.
[6]. Pro, XBee. "Data sheet Digi International Inc."
[7]. Instruments, Texas. "Low-cost low-power 2.4 GHz RF transceiver."
CC2500 datasheet (2010).
[8]. Wu, Xinzhou, Saurabha Tavildar, Sanjay Shakkottai, Tom Richardson,
Junyi Li, Rajiv Laroia, and Aleksandar Jovicic. "FlashLinQ: A synchronous
distributed scheduler for peer-to-peer ad hoc networks." IEEE/ACM
Transactions on Networking (TON) 21, no. 4 (2013): 1215-1228.
[9]. Yang, MiJeong, et al. "Development of device-to-device communication
in LTE-Advanced system." Consumer Electronics (ICCE), 2014 IEEE
International Conference on. IEEE, 2014.
[10]. Karvounas, Dimitrios, Andreas Georgakopoulos, Kostas Tsagkaris, Vera
Stavroulaki, and Panagiotis Demestichas. "Smart management of D2D
constructs: an experiment-based approach." Communications Magazine, IEEE
52, no. 4 (2014): 82-89.
[11]. Brandner, Gnther, Udo Schilcher, and Christian Bettstetter.
"Cooperative relaying in car-to-car communications: Initial results from an
experimental study." In Communications, Control and Signal Processing
(ISCCSP), 2010 4th International Symposium on, pp. 1-4. IEEE, 2010.
[12]. Ayadurai, Vicknesan, and Mikael Prytz. "Software radio platform for
network-assisted device-to-device (na-d2d) concepts." In Proceedings of the
second workshop on Software radio implementation forum, pp. 53-60. ACM,
2013.
[13]. Jokinen, Markku, Marko Mkelinen, and Tuomo Hnninen. "Demo: coprimary spectrum sharing with inter-operator D2D trial." In Proceedings of
the 20th annual international conference on Mobile computing and
networking, pp. 291-294. ACM, 2014.
[14]. Nishiyama, Hiroki, Minora Ito, and Nei Kato. "Relay-by-smartphone:
realizing multihop device-to-device communications." Communications
Magazine, IEEE 52, no. 4 (2014): 56-65.
[15]. Asadi, Arash, and Vincenzo Mancuso. "WiFi Direct and LTE D2D in
action." In Wireless Days (WD), 2013 IFIP, pp. 1-8. IEEE, 2013.
[16]. Xing, Bo, Karim Seada, and Nalini Venkatasubramanian. "An
experimental study on wi-fi ad-hoc mode for mobile device-to-device video
delivery." In INFOCOM Workshops 2009, IEEE, pp. 1-6. IEEE, 2009.
[17]. Shen, Wenlong, Weisheng Hong, Xianghui Cao, Bo Yin, Devu
Manikantan Shila, and Yu Cheng. "Secure key establishment for Device-toDevice communications." In Global Communications Conference
(GLOBECOM), 2014 IEEE, pp. 336-340. IEEE, 2014.
[18]. Merwaday, Arvind, Nadisanka Rupasinghe, Ismail Guvenc, Walid Saad,
and Murat Yuksel. "USRP-based indoor channel sounding for D2D and multihop communications." In Wireless and Microwave Technology Conference
(WAMICON), 2014 IEEE 15th Annual, pp. 1-6. IEEE, 2014.
[19]. Musaloiu-E, Razvan, and Andreas Terzis. "Minimising the effect of
WiFi interference in 802.15. 4 wireless sensor networks." International
Journal of Sensor Networks 3, no. 1 (2008): 43-54.
[20]. Atmel Coorporation, Atmel ATmega328P Datasheet.
[21]. Configuration, X. C. T. U. "Test Utility Software: Users Guide." Digi
International Inc (2008).
[22]. "Arduino." Retrived From: http://arduino.cc/en, Last Accessed October
2015.
[23]. Yu, Chia-Hao, Klaus Doppler, Cassio B. Ribeiro, and Olav Tirkkonen.
"Resource sharing optimization for device-to-device communication

underlaying cellular networks." Wireless Communications, IEEE Transactions


on 10, no. 8 (2011): 2752-2763.
[24]. Sugano, Masashi, Tomonori Kawazoe, Yoshikazu Ohta, and Masayuki
Murata. "Indoor localization system using RSSI measurement of wireless
sensor network based on ZigBee standard." Target 538 (2006): 050.
[25]. Srinivasan, Kannan, Prabal Dutta, Arsalan Tavakoli, and Philip Levis.
"Understanding the causes of packet delivery success and failure in dense
wireless sensor networks." In Proceedings of the 4th international conference
on Embedded networked sensor systems, pp. 419-420. ACM, 2006.

Vibhutesh Kumar Singh (M76


SM81F87) and the other authors may
include biographies at the end of regular
papers. Biographies are often not
included in conference-related papers.
This author became a Member (M) of
IEEE in 1976, a Senior Member (SM) in
1981, and a Fellow (F) in 1987. The first
paragraph may contain a place and/or
date of birth (list place, then date). Next, the authors
educational background is listed. The degrees should be listed
with type of degree in what field, which institution, city, state,
and country, and year the degree was earned. The authors
major field of study should be lower-cased.
Hardik Chawla was born in Greenwich Village, New York
City, in 1977. He received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in
aerospace engineering from the University of Virginia,
Charlottesville, in 2001 and the Ph.D. degree in mechanical
engineering from Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, in
2008.
Vivek Ashok Bohara (M87) received the B.S. degree in
mechanical engineering from National Chung Cheng
University, Chiayi, Taiwan, in 2004 and the M.S. degree in
mechanical engineering from National Tsing Hua University,
Hsinchu, Taiwan, in 2006. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D.
degree in mechanical engineering at Texas A&M University,
College Station.
Mr. Authors awards and honors include the Frew
Fellowship (Australian Academy of Science), the I. I. Rabi
Prize (APS), the European Frequency and Time Forum
Award, the Carl Zeiss Research Award, the William F.
Meggers Award and the Adolph Lomb Medal (OSA).