Feasibility Analysis and Implementation of the IEEE 802.15.

4 Multi-hop Beacon
Enabled Network
Jaeyeol Ha, Wook Hyun Kwon, J.J Kim*, Y.H Kim*, Y.H Shin*
School of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Seoul National University, KT Convergence Lab*
{hjy8099,whkown}@cisl.snu.ac.kr, {jungkim, yhokim, yhshin01}@kt.co.kr

Abstract
The beacon enabled mode in the IEEE 802.15.4 networks is essential to power constrained applications. However, the
beacon collisions with other beacons or data (control) frames make the multi-hop beacon enabled mode difficult to be built and
maintained. The analysis and experiment results of this paper show that 802.15.4 multi-hop beacon enabled networks are
feasible when the beacon order (BO) is larger than one and the distribution of coordinators is not too dense under low traffic
load.

1. Introduction
Recently, wireless networking provides more flexible show that 802.15.4 multi-hop beacon enabled network can be
connectivity in daily life. Wireless personal area networks built except very unfavorable environment. However, the
(WPANs) are short range wireless networks built from small, unfavorable environment is not specified clearly.
energy-efficient devices operating on battery power, that Some applications in which the devices are widely
require little infrastructure to operate, or none at all. The located and have the limited battery power may require the
IEEE 802.15.4 is a wireless MAC(medium access control) multi-hop beacon enabled network based on peer-to-peer
and physical layer specifications for low-rate wireless topology. In the multi-hop beacon enabled networks the
personal area networks. The standard will be used in some multiple beacons from coordinators take up the medium and
applications such as home automation, industrial sensing and may collides with each other or data (control) frames.
control, environment monitoring and sensing. These Therefore, compared to 802.15.4 beacon enabled network
applications have more relaxed throughput requirements based on star topology, to build the multi-hop one based on
under tens of kbps and lower power consumption peer-to-peer topology requires more considerations. The
requirements [5]. The main concern of these applications is main object of this paper is to find the proper distribution of
that of extremely low power consumption, since it is coordinators and network parameters to build 802.15.4 multi-
impossible or undesirable to replace or recharge batteries for hop beacon enabled networks.
the devices [5]. For these applications, the IEEE 802.15.4 has The rest of this paper is structured as follows. First, an
been developed to provide low complexity, cost, and power overview of the IEEE 802.15.4 is given. Then the analysis of
consumption for low data-rate wireless connectivity. the beacon collision is presented to find the proper
The standard defines two channel access mechanisms, distribution of coordinators and network parameters. Next,
depending on whether beacon frames (sent periodically by the implementation and the experiment results are presented
the coordinator to synchronize communications) are used or to validate the analysis. Finally, conclusion and futurework is
not. The standard also supports two topologies: in the star given.
topology network, all communications must go through the
PAN coordinator which is the central controller device of the 2. Overview of IEEE 802.15.4
WPAN. In the peer-to-peer topology, the devices can
In the following subsections, a brief description of the
communicate with one another directly, but still the PAN
IEEE 802.15.4 is given. There are many design features in
coordinator must be present [5]. For energy constrained
the 802.15.4. However, this paper introduces some part of
applications, the beacon enabled network is essential, since
that to help understanding of this paper. Complete
time synchronized sleep and wake-up mechanism can be
specifications can be found in [5].
adopted. There are some researches about the IEEE 802.15.4
2.1. Operating Bands and Data Rates
beacon enabled network [5]. However, all of them are
restricted to star topology. The standard introduces the use The IEEE 802.15.4 defines two PHY layers, the 2.4 GHz
of the peer to peer communications topology such as cluster and 868/915 MHz band PHYs. A total of 27 channels with
tree [5]. In many applications, the star topology is not three different raw data rates are allocated in the IEEE
sufficient, since it has the limited personal operating space 802.15.4: 16 channels with a data rate of 250 kb/s (or,
(POS) around tens of meters. The simulation results of [5] expressed in symbols, 62.5 ksymbols/s) in the 2.4 GHz band,

-1-
10 channels with a data rate of 40 kb/s (40ksymbols/s) in the (e.g., during an association procedure). The last one is
915 MHz band, and 1 channel with a data rate of 20 kb/s (20 guaranteed time slot (GTS) data transmission. No CSMA-
ksymbols/s) in the 868 MHz band. An IEEE 802.15.4 CA is needed in GTS data transmission, since the GTS is
network should choose one channel to operate depending on allocated to the particular device.
channel condition, existing PANs and so on. 2.4. Self-Configuration and Channel Scans
The IEEE 802.15.4 defines association and disassociation
2.2. Beacon Enabled Mode and Superframe Structure
functions for self-configuration in its MAC sublayer. To
An 802.15.4 network can operate in either beacon associate with a coordinator, a device will perform channel
enabled mode or non-beacon-enabled mode. In beacon- scan to find the existing coordinators. There are three kind of
enabled mode, a coordinator broadcasts beacons periodically scans in the 802.15.4. The energy scan measures the energy
to synchronize the attached devices. In non-beacon enabled level of each channel to select suitable channel to be used.
mode, a coordinator does not broadcast beacons periodically, The active channel scan in which a beacon request frame is
but may transmit a beacon when a device requests the beacon sent and the passive channel scan in which no beacon request
for some purpose such as scanning the existing network. A frame is sent to locate a suitable coordinator. After the scan
superframe structure is used in beacon enabled mode. The procedure ended successfully, a node selects a channel and
format of the superframe is defined by the coordinator and an identifier (ID) for the PAN, determines whether to use
informed by the beacon. From Figure 1, we can see the beacon-enabled mode or non-beacon-enabled mode, and
superframe comprises an active part and an optional inactive choose the beacon order and superframe order based on the
part, and is bounded by network beacons. The length of the beacon of the selected coordinator found in scanning. Then
superframe (beacon interval, BI) and the length of its active the node sends association request frame to be allocated a
part (superframe duration, SD) are determined by the beacon 16-bit short address for the device and to inform many other
order (BO) and superframe order (SO), respectively. The options in the MAC layer PAN information base (MPIB).
active part of the superframe is divided into Finally, the association response frame including a 16-bit
aNumSuperframeSlots (default value: 16) equally sized slots, short address is transmitted by indirect transmission from the
and the beacon frame is transmitted in the first slot of each coordinator to the node.
superframe. The active part can be further broken down into
3. Network Feasibility Analysis
two periods, a contention access period (CAP) and an
optional contention-free period (CFP). The optional CFP This paper evaluates the feasibility of 802.15.4 multi-hop
may accommodate up to seven GTSs, and a GTS may beacon enabled networks. To operate 802.15.4 beacon
occupy more than one slot period. A slotted carrier sense enabled mode a node should continue to receive the beacon
multiple access with collision avoidance (CSMA-CA) periodically from its coordinator. However, in multi-hop case
mechanism is used for channel access during the CAP. All the beacons can be corrupted by collisions with beacons from
contention-based transactions shall be completed before the other coordinators or data (control) frames from nodes which
CFP begins. are associated with other coordinators. Control frames or
data frames can avoid collisions or be retransmitted by
CSMA/CA mechanism, but beacons can't. This beacon
collision is one of the main problems to make 802.15.4
multi-hop beacon enabled networks difficult to be operated.
Another problem is that the multiple beacons from
coordinators may take up the CAP of the superframe. If there
are too many beacons, the beacons take up most part of the
CAP and the data (control) frames can't be delivered.
However, to analyze the problem is very complicated. The
Fig. 1 An example of the superframe structure in [5] experimental results are present in the next section.
2.3. Data Transmission Methods Therefore, we derive the beacon collision probability to show
In the IEEE 802.15.4, there are different data transfer the feasibility of the network. In the analysis, we assume as
methods as follows. The first one is direct data transmission. follows.
Unslotted CSMA-CA or slotted CSMA-CA is used for direct z In 802.15.4 multi-hop beacon enabled networks, a node is
transmission, depending on whether non-beacon-enabled synchronized to its coordinator. However, all nodes in
mode or beacon-enabled mode is used. The second one is network may not be synchronized. Therefore, in this
indirect data transmission. In this way, a data frame is kept in analysis beacon, data and control frames from nodes
a pending list by the coordinator, waiting for extraction by associated with different coordinators assume to be
the corresponding device. A device can find out if it has a located continuously in time domain.
packet pending in the list by checking the beacon frames
received from its coordinator. Occasionally, indirect data z Every coordinator has the identical superframe structure
transmission can also happen in nonbeacon- enabled mode (the same SO and BO values).

-2-
z GTS is not considered. In other words, all active portion
is CAP.
z A coordinator starts the beacon transmission at random
time. The time is uniformly distributed. : The IEEE
802.15.4 standard doesn't define the time to start the
beacon transmission in MLME-START.request primitive
in [8]. So, we can't schedule the beacon to avoid the
beacon collision.
z The lengths of beacon and data or control frame are
constants.
z The unit of frame or superframe length in the analysis is
the symbol(=4bit) in [8]. Fig. 3 Pw when b=46
3.2. Lost Synchronization Case
z Just one symbol overlap is considered as collision.
After the association with a coordinator, a node continues
z The hidden terminal effect is not considered. to track its beacon to maintain the synchronization. When a
3.1. Lost Coordinator Case node is synchronized with a coordinator, it doesn't transmit
frames when its coordinator transmits beacon. However,
To associate with a coordinator an.15.4 node should find since the nodes don't care with the other coordinator's beacon
at least one beacon through the scan procedure. Although transmission, frames may cause the collision with the
there are many coordinators in its POS, a node can't receive beacons. If the collision is not caused by beacon but caused
some beacon by collisions. If the collision is caused by the by data or control frame, the beacons are not collided
data or control frame, a node will receive beacons through continuously. In this case the node doesn't lose the
the retries of the scan procedure. However, if the collision is coordinator, but the node should watch the channel for some
caused by beacons, the collision happens periodically and the beacon periods to re-synchronize and it causes much power
node will not receive the beacon continuously. After a node consumption. As shown in Figure 4, for the beacon to collide
is associated with a coordinator whose beacon was not with a data or control frame or its Ack (acknowledgement), a
collided with existing beacons, the beacons from the frame must be located in (d+a+i-1) region, since after that
coordinators started after the association may cause beacon region the CSMA/CA mechanism can detect the beacon and
collision. In that case, the node lost its coordinator and the collision can be avoided. Therefore, the probability of
should find another one. If the probability that the beacon lost synchronization by a frame in a superframe, Pl is given
doesn't collide with any beacons from n coordinators which as
started after association is Pa, the probability of the lost
coordinator probability by beacon collision, Pw is

As shown in Figure 2, for the beacon from its own

where d is the number of symbols of the data or control
coordinator not to collide with any beacons from n ones, the
frame length, $a$ is the number of symbols of the ack frame
other beacons must be located in
BO
length, i(=16) is the average interspace between the frame
(aBaseSuperframeDuration* 2 -2b) region. Therefore, and the ack.

Fig. 2 No Beacon Collision Case

Fig. 4 Lost Synchronization Case
(2) 4. Implementation
where b is the number of symbols of the beacon length,
aBaseSuperframeDuration is 960 symbols defined in [8], n is The purpose of our implementation is to validate our
the number of coordinators in POS. analysis through some experiments and find additional
results which is difficult to be derived from the analysis.

-3-
 4.1. Implementation of Network Protocols Figure 6 shows the comparison of the lost coordinator
We have implemented a simple network layer to enable analysis and the first experiment results. The results are very
the IEEE 802.15.4 multi-hop beacon enabled network. The similar, but experiment shows a little lower collision
network layer defines three kind of nodes which are network probability than the analysis. Although the analysis assumes
coordinator, coordinator and end device. The network only one symbol overlap is considered as collision, in some
coordinator is the PAN coordinator in the IEEE 802.15.4 experiments a beacon survives despite of overlap. In all
which is the principal controller of a PAN and provides experiments, we try to locate the position of nodes having
synchronization services through the transmission of beacons. same receiving signal power, but sometimes the more
The coordinator also provides synchronization services powerful beacon is not corrupted by collision. Therefore, the
through the transmission of beacons[5]. The end device is results are reasonable.
synchronized with a network coordinator or coordinators.
When the network coordinator turns on, it scans the channels,
select suitable one and starts the transmission of beacons
periodically and the network with network address 0x0000.
When the coordinator turns on, it scans the channels, finds
the network through the beacons from the network
coordinator or early started coordinators and start the
transmission of beacons periodically. When the end device
turns on, it also finds coordinators by scanning, selects its
coordinator and is synchronized with that. A unique network
address is allocated to the every node except the network
coordinator through the association procedure. The network
layer allocates the pre-defined unique network address. This
is very simple but not flexible. However, the unique address Fig. 6 Lost Coordinator Case
generation method is not an important issue in this paper. Figure 7 shows the number of beacons not corrupted in a
4.2. Testbed beacon period according to the number of coordinators in the
We use Korwin Zigbee Development Board [8], first experiment. When there are 10 coordinators, average 5.8
developed by Korwin (see Figure 5), as our implementation beacons are not corrupted and 4.2 beacons are corrupted by
platform and testbed. The MCU of the board is Atmel's collisions. As a result, when the node associated with the
ATMEGA128L [8] which has 128K bytes of programmable reference node lost its coordinator, the node can be re-
flash and 4Kbytes of data memory. The radio transceiver on associated with another not colliding coordinator.
the board is theCC2420 from Chipcon [8] which is 2.4GHz
RF transceiver for the IEEE 802.15.4. We implemented 16
network nodes and each can operates as a network
coordinator, a coordinator or an end device according to the
experiments.

Fig. 7 Number of Beacon not corrupted

The second experiment is to find the BO which is not much
Fig. 5 Korwin Zigbee Development Board
taken up its CAP by beacons. In this experiment, the
4.3. Experiment Setup and Results probability of association procedure failure is counted.
The first experiment is related to the lost coordinator case Because the association procedure includes both direct and
analysis. The BO=SO=0 is chosen for the worst case, since indirect transmission methods and the retransmission
as shown in the analysis, the small BO causes more beacon mechanism of the CSMA/CA, the association procedure can
collisions. According to the number of coordinators which represents all the transmission and reception method in the
starts after the association procedure, the beacon collision 802.15.4. As shown Figure 8, when BO is 0 or 1, beacons
probability of the reference coordinator was observed. Also, from only 2 coordinators takes up much of the CAP and the
the number of not corrupted beacons was observed. data (control) frame transmission fails very often. However,

-4-
in case of BO lager than 1, the association succeeds more build 802.15.4 beacon enabled networks requires some
than 90% with many coordinators in POS. considerations. The analysis and experiment results of this
paper show that 802.15.4 multi-hop beacon enabled networks
are feasible under the conditions as follows. First, the BO
should be larger than 1. Second, the coordinator should be
distributed properly. The distribution of coordinators is close
to the BO. For example, when the BO is 2, coordinators less
than 8 should be distributed in the POS of a node. Third, the
traffic load should be low. It is also related to the BO. If the
BO is 2 and 6 coordinators exist in the POS of a node, one
data frame in time longer than 5 beacon periods should be
loaded in the POS of a node. In that case, a node loses the
synchronization (beacon from its coordinator) less than 1\%.
In most power constrained applications, the low traffic load
is a reasonable assumption. As described above, the network
Fig. 8 Number of Coordinator which cause over 10% designer should determine the BO, the distribution of
Association Procedure failure coordinators according to the traffic load to build an 802.15.4
The third experiment is related to the lost synchronization multi-hop beacon enabled network. This paper provides
case analysis. An end device (because multiple end devices guidelines to design 802.15.4 multi-hop beacon enabled
case causes collision with each other) transmits a data frame networks. We will implement completed 802.15.4 multi-hop
at random time and there are five not colliding beacons beacon enabled networks for power constrained applications
except the coordinator of the end device. When a data frame such as sensor networks based on results of this paper. The
is transmitted, the probability of lost synchronization to a performance evaluations such as power efficiency and end-
reference coordinator was observed. In this experiment, BO to-end delay of 802.15.4 multi-hop beacon enabled networks
over 1 is used, since when BO is 0 or 1, data transmissions are also left as futurework.
fail very often as explanations of the second experiment.
As shown in Figure 9, the results of the experiment are very Reference
similar to the analysis, but experiment shows a little higher
[1] Ed Callaway, Monique Bourgeois, Vinay Mitter, Bob
collision probability than the analysis. The analysis ignores
Heile, Jose A. Gutierrez, Marco Naeve, IEEE 802.15.4:
the existence of other beacons, but the beacons takes up the
Developing Standard for Low-Power Low-Cost Wireless
CAP in the experiment. That may be the reason of the
Personal Area Networks," IEEE Network, Oct. 2001
difference. As a result, since high traffic load may cause
often loss of synchronization, the applications with high [2] Bhaskar Krishnamachari, Gang Lu and Cauligi
traffic load are not feasible for 802.15.4 multi-hop beacon Raghavendra, “Performance Evaluation of the IEEE
enabled networks. 802.15.4 MAC for Low-Rate Low-Power Wireless
Networks," In Proceedings on EWCN '04, Apr. 2004.
[3] Shairmina Shafi, Jelena Misic, Vojislav B. Misic,
“Performance of IEEE 802.15.4 beacon enabled PAN
with uplink transmissions in non-saturation mode-
access delay for finite buffers,” in Proceedings on
Broadband Networks 2004. pp. 416-425, Oct. 2004.
[4] Jianliang Zheng, M.J. Lee, " Will IEEE 802.15.4 make
ubiquitous networking a reality? : a discussion on a
potential low power, low bit rate standard,”
Communications Magazine, IEEE, vol. 42, pp. 140-146,
June 2004.
[5] 802.15.4-2003 IEEE Standard for Information
Technology-Part 15.4: Wireless Medium Access Control
Fig. 9 Synchronization Lost Probability
(MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) specifications for
Low Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks (LR-
5. Conclusion & Futurework WPANS), 2003.
For the power constrained applications, the beacon [6] http://www.korwin.net/english/pns/zigbee 3.asp
enabled mode in IEEE 802.15.4 networks is essential. [7] http://www.atmel.com/dyn/general/tech doc.asp?doc
However, since multiple beacons cause collisions with other id=7236
beacons or data (control) frames and take up the medium, to [8] http://www.chipcon.com

-5-