Page 42 - 2024-Vol20-Issue2

38 | Jumaa, Mohamad, Allawy & Mohammed

TABLE I.
OA FOR GTFT NODE BEHAVIOUR EXPERIMENTS.

No. of Exp. ? (F1) N (packet) c (watt) e Throughput (T1) Phi (T2) Psi (T3) Mean (M)
(F2) (F3) (F4) (packet/sec)
1 1 0.3061 75.1770
2 1 1000 0.001 0.08 225 0.2250 0.5910 98.3930
3 1 67.3333
4 0.5 500 0.0008 0.05 294 0.5880 1 51.7768
5 0.5 0.1754 94.3628
6 0.5 200 0.0003 0.02 200 1 0.5223 24.6078
7 0.2 0.4385 57.4326
8 0.2 1000 0.0008 0.02 155 0.1550 0.1259 13.7289
9 0.2 0.1046 15.4780
500 0.0003 0.08 282 0.5660 0.2040

200 0.001 0.05 73 0.3850

1000 0.0003 0.05 172 0.1720

500 0.001 0.02 41 0.0820

200 0.0008 0.08 46 0.2300

TABLE II.
OA FOR GTFT NODE BEHAVIOR WITH SNR.

No. ? N c e Throu Phi Psi Mean Sm St Se Ve SNR
of (F1) (pac (watt) (F4) -ghput (T2) (T3) (M)
Exp. ket) (F3)
(F2) (T1)
(packet

/sec)

1 1 1000 0.001 0.08 225 0.2250 0.3061 75.1770 16955 50625 33670 16835 -56.3687

2 1 500 0.0008 0.05 294 0.5880 0.5910 98.3930 29044 86437 57393 28697 -51.0837

3 1 200 0.0003 0.02 200 1 1 67.3333 13601 40002 26401 13200 -41.8716

4 0.5 1000 0.0008 0.02 155 0.1550 0.1754 51.7768 8042.5 24025 15982 7991 -57.3764

5 0.5 500 0.0003 0.08 282 0.5660 0.5223 94.3628 26713 79525 52812 26406 -51.4765

6 0.5 200 0.001 0.05 73 0.3850 0.4385 24.6078 1816.6 5329.3 03513 1757 -40.7685

7 0.2 1000 0.0003 0.05 172 0.1720 0.1259 57.4326 9895.5 29584 19688 9844 -59.4618

8 0.2 500 0.001 0.02 41 0.0820 0.1046 13.7289 565.4453 1681 1116 558 -50.0992

9 0.2 200 0.0008 0.08 46 0.2300 0.2040 15.4780 718.7055 2116.1 1397 698 -42.1097

TABLE III.
TRAILS RATIO AVERAGE.

EXP. No. P N c e TABLE IV.
1 -49.774 -57.735 -49.078 -49.985 CONCLUSION OF GTFT NODE’S BEHAVIOUR
2 -49.873 -50.886 -50.189 -50.438
3 -50.556 -41.583 -50.936 -49.782 OPTIMIZATION USING TAGUCHI METHOD.
0.6831 6.8491 0.7467 0.4530
Difference (D)

number (1), as is the case for experiment number 3, whose Factor Impaction
results are shown in Fig. 3. As for the results of experiment serial
number (4), shown in Fig. 4, we notice that there is a differ- Power constraints per node (P)
ence in the value of ? due to the difference in the value of the Number of packets required to forward (N) number
packet request, which directly affected it, as is the case for 3
experiments numbers (5, 6, 7, 8, and 9), (see Fig. 5, Fig. 6, power consumption per node (C) 1
Fig. 7, Fig. 8, and Fig. 9). Grade of generosity GoG (e) 2
4