Research Article

Empirical Study and Modeling of Vehicular Communications at Intersections in the 5 GHz Band

Table 1

Comparison of related works.

Related worksFrequency band usedExperiment typeEnvironment usedTypes of blockagesStreet detailsPerformance metrics

Böhm et al., 2010 [11]5.9 GHzReal worldUrban,
highway, rural
Vegetation,
buildings,
parked vehicles
Not specifiedDistance versus packet reception ratio

Meireles et al., 2010 [12]5.85–5.925 GHz,
2.412 GHz
Real worldUrban and
parking lot
Buildings, trees,
vehicles
(truck, van)
Various lanes
street
Distance versus received signal strength indicator,
distance versus packet delivery ratio

Sommer et al., 2011 [13]5.89 GHzReal world and
simulation
Urban and
rural
Residential and
commercial
buildings
IntersectionDistance versus received signal strength,
length of intersection versus received signal strength,
index versus received signal strength

Sommer et al., 2012 [14]5.89 GHzReal world and
simulation
Urban and
rural
VehiclesOne-lane and two-lane streetReceived signal strength versus distance

Sommer et al., 2015 [15]5.89 GHzSimulationHighway and
suburban
Building and
vehicles
Two-lane
street
Empirical cumulative density function versus
beacon interval,
channel busy ratio,
time after encounter versus beacon interval

Lin et al., 2012 [16]5.9 GHzReal world and
field trial
Not specifiedCochannel
interference
Not specifiedDistance versus packet loss,
distance versus latency

Gozalvez et al., 2012 [17]5.895–5.905 GHzReal worldUrban and
highway
Buildings,
trees, vehicles
Various lanes
street
Distance versus packet delivery ratio

Schumacher et al., 2012 [18]5.9 GHzReal worldUrbanBuildingsIntersectionDistance versus signal power,
distance versus packet delivery ratio

Tchouankem et al., 2013 [19]5.9 GHzReal world and
simulation
RuralVegetationsIntersectionDistance versus signal power,
distance versus packet delivery ratio

Tchouankem and Lorenzen, 2015 [20]5.9 GHzReal worldUrban and ruralBuildings and vehicleIntersectionDistance versus signal power,
distance versus packet delivery ratio

Barcelos et al., 2014 [21]5.9 GHzReal worldUrban/rural
(campus environment)
BuildingsTwo-lane
street
Distance versus average packet loss,
distance versus average latency,
distance versus average delay,
distance versus bitrate

Viriyasitavat et al., 2016 [22]2.4 GHzReal world and
simulation
Urban
(open environment)
VehicleOne-lane
street
Distance versus packet delivery ratio,
time versus penetration distance,
time versus reachability

Our work5.8 GHzReal worldRural, urban,
mixed
Buildings,
vegetations
IntersectionDistance versus packet delivery ratio
heat maps for packet delivery