On Jul 11, 2007, at 10:48 AM, Chonggang Wang wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to test the pure throughput of 802.15.4 and conduct an
experiment as follows:
\/ \/
| |
--- ---
Hello,
I am trying to test the pure throughput of 802.15.4 and conduct an experiment
as follows:
\/ \/
| |
--- --- ---
| PC1|
Chonggang Wang wrote:
the received data rate at PC2 is only about 35 Kbps. Since tmote sky
uses chipcon 2420 with 250 Kbps data rate, 35 Kbps is surprisingly
pretty slow since in this case there should not be any collision. I am
not sure if those two motes automatically go to sleep state. Also i
Philip Levis wrote:
On Jul 11, 2007, at 10:48 AM, Chonggang Wang wrote:
Since tmote sky uses chipcon 2420
with 250 Kbps data rate, 35 Kbps is surprisingly
MAC backoff.
Phil
Supposing we could get some audio encoded by a chip like akustica makes,
and maybe compressed, and locally
Chonggang Wang wrote:
Yes. Baud rate is bit per second. I set 115200 (115.2 Kbps) in my experiment.
I got 35 Kbps (bit per second) throughput at receiver side.
since 35 is far smaller than 115.2, the bottleneck is not the serial
port, it is in air-interface.
The MAC in the mote that outputs
: [Tinyos-help] throughput of tmote sky
To: Chonggang Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: tinyos-help@Millennium.Berkeley.EDU
On Jul 11, 2007, at 10:48 AM, Chonggang Wang wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to test the pure throughput of 802.15.4 and conduct
an
experiment as follows
larger than 35 Kbps. I still do not know the reason.
Thanks,
Chonggang
- Original Message -
From: Philip Levis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 1:57 pm
Subject: Re: [Tinyos-help] throughput of tmote sky
To: Chonggang Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: tinyos-help
should be: 3.84/(3.84+3.176)*250K = 136.8 Kbps 35
Kbps.
Am I missing any delay/overhead? Thanks.
Chonggang
- Original Message -
From: Joe Polastre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 2:33 pm
Subject: Re: [Tinyos-help] throughput of tmote sky
To: Chonggang Wang [EMAIL
Chonggang Wang wrote:
Yes. Baud rate is bit per second. I set 115200 (115.2 Kbps) in my
experiment.
I got 35 Kbps (bit per second) throughput at receiver side.
since 35 is far smaller than 115.2, the bottleneck is not the
serial
port, it is in air-interface.
The MAC in the mote
1. Turn around time,
aTurnaroundTime is 16 symbols specified in the standard. Since the symbol rate
is 62.5 Ksymbols/second, aTurnaroundTime = 16 * (1/62.5) = 192 us. (where did
you get 450 us?)
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/cc2420.pdf
-Joe
As indicated on page 66 in cc2420.pdf, turnaround time is 192 us or 128 us, not
450us.
-Chonggang
- Original Message -
From: Joe Polastre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 3:58 pm
Subject: Re: [Tinyos-help] throughput of tmote sky
To: Chonggang Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc
Subject: Re: [Tinyos-help] throughput of tmote sky
To: Chonggang Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: tinyos-help@Millennium.Berkeley.EDU
On Jul 11, 2007, at 10:48 AM, Chonggang Wang wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to test the pure throughput of 802.15.4 and conduct
an
experiment as follows
has 2420?
Sincerely,
Chonggang
- Original Message -
From: Francis Simoneau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 4:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Tinyos-help] throughput of tmote sky
To: Joe Polastre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Chonggang Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED], Philip Levis [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Jul 11, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Chonggang Wang wrote:
Thanks for the posting, Phil. Yes, There is a backoff in CSMA-CA.
However the backoff is not that much to make 250 Kbps down to 35
Kbps. The reason is below.
According the IEEE 802.15.4 standard 2003 version, the average
backoff time
Subject: Re: [Tinyos-help] throughput of tmote sky
To: Joe Polastre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Chonggang Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED], Philip Levis [EMAIL PROTECTED],
tinyos-help@Millennium.Berkeley.EDU
Joe is right about other delays in the system
Assuming TmoteSky means Boomerang 2.0.4 and default compile
15 matches
Mail list logo
