Logo
ScienceStack
Table of Contents
Fetching ...
Sign In

On the Performance of Non-Terrestrial Networks to Support the Internet of Things

Dengke Wang, Alessandro Traspadini, Marco Giordani, Mohamed-Slim Alouini, Michele Zorzi

TL;DR

This paper demonstrates the paradigm, and evaluates how common Low-Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) technologies, designed and developed to operate for IoT systems, work in NTNs, and formalizes an optimization problem to decide whether and how IoT traffic can be offloaded to LEO satellites to reduce the burden on terrestrial gateways.

Abstract

The advent of the Internet of Things (IoT) era, where billions of devices and sensors are becoming more and more connected and ubiquitous, is putting a strain on traditional terrestrial networks, that may no longer be able to fulfill service requirements efficiently. This issue is further complicated in rural and remote areas with scarce and low-quality cellular coverage. To fill this gap, the research community is focusing on non-terrestrial networks (NTNs), where Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), High Altitude Platforms (HAPs) and satellites can serve as aerial/space gateways to aggregate, process, and relay the IoT traffic. In this paper we demonstrate this paradigm, and evaluate how common Low-Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) technologies, designed and developed to operate for IoT systems, work in NTNs. We then formalize an optimization problem to decide whether and how IoT traffic can be offloaded to LEO satellites to reduce the burden on terrestrial gateways.

On the Performance of Non-Terrestrial Networks to Support the Internet of Things

TL;DR

This paper demonstrates the paradigm, and evaluates how common Low-Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) technologies, designed and developed to operate for IoT systems, work in NTNs, and formalizes an optimization problem to decide whether and how IoT traffic can be offloaded to LEO satellites to reduce the burden on terrestrial gateways.

Abstract

The advent of the Internet of Things (IoT) era, where billions of devices and sensors are becoming more and more connected and ubiquitous, is putting a strain on traditional terrestrial networks, that may no longer be able to fulfill service requirements efficiently. This issue is further complicated in rural and remote areas with scarce and low-quality cellular coverage. To fill this gap, the research community is focusing on non-terrestrial networks (NTNs), where Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), High Altitude Platforms (HAPs) and satellites can serve as aerial/space gateways to aggregate, process, and relay the IoT traffic. In this paper we demonstrate this paradigm, and evaluate how common Low-Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) technologies, designed and developed to operate for IoT systems, work in NTNs. We then formalize an optimization problem to decide whether and how IoT traffic can be offloaded to LEO satellites to reduce the burden on terrestrial gateways.
Paper Structure (20 sections, 10 equations, 5 figures, 3 tables)

This paper contains 20 sections, 10 equations, 5 figures, 3 tables.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Enabling Technologies for lpwan
  3. SigFox
  4. LoRa
  5. NB-IoT
  6. System Model
  7. Scenario
  8. Link-Level Model
  9. Channel model
  10. Signal detection policy
  11. Traffic model
  12. Optimized Offloading
  13. Performance Evaluation
  14. Network Capacity
  15. Success Probability
  16. ...and 5 more sections

Figures (5)

  • Figure 1: The IoT-NTN scenario and relative use cases.
  • Figure 2: Network capacity and average success probability of different technologies, vs. the number of IDs, considering an of radius $r=0.35$ km.
  • Figure 3: Average success probability vs. $r$, based on LoRa. We consider ground-to-ground (ID-TG) transmissions with the TG, or ground-to-space (ID-L) transmissions with the LEO satellite, possibly relayed via a HAP (ID-H-L).
  • Figure 4: Minimum number of platforms needed to cover the whole area vs. the radius of the service area.
  • Figure 5: Average success probability vs. the TG density (left) and the ID density (right), considering different offloading options. We set $r=5$ km.