Internet Technology Letters - 2021 - Saif - Multi UAV and SAR Collaboration Model For Disaster Management in B5G Networks

Received: 8 April 2021 Revised: 14 June 2021 Accepted: 30 June 2021
DOI: 10.1002/itl2.310
SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE
Multi-UAV and SAR collaboration model for disaster

management in B5G networks
Abdu Saif1 Kaharudin Dimyati1 Kamarul Ariffin Noordin1

Saeed Hamood Alsamhi2,3 Ammar Hawbani4
1
Department of Electrical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering, University of Ensuring communication infrastructures always alive during disaster mitiga-
Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia tion and recovery is of paramount importance. In this case, Unmanned Aerial
2
Athlone Institute of Technology, Athlone, vehicle (UAV) will be the ideal substitute for the malfunctioning ground base
Ireland
station due to disaster. Henceforth, we suggest a multi-UAV and Search and
3
IBB University, Ibb, Yemen
4
Rescue (SAR) collaboration model in this letter. To improve its connectivity, we
School of Computer Science and
Technology, University of Science and propose an optimal SAR elevation angle for the multi-UAV and SARs to adminis-
Technology of China, Hefei, China ter larger disaster areas effectively and efficiently. We evaluate the performance
of the proposed model in terms of path loss, throughput, and coverage proba-
Correspondence
Kaharudin Dimyati, Department of bility. The results demonstrate that the proposed model achieves a significant
Electrical Engineering, Faculty of enhancement in serving the SARs.
Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
KEYWORDS
Email: kaharudin@um.edu.my
B5G, collaboration, disaster management, multi-UAV, optimal elevation angle, QoS, SAR
1 I N T RO DU CT ION
Terrestrial communication networks can be damaged due to wide-scale natural disasters such as Hurricanes Sandy and
Irma1 and other unexpected events such as fires and flooding. Fortunately, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) can save
the day.2 UAVs can serve as flying relay Base Stations (BSs) to serve large coverage area with efficient connectivity and
optimal signal strength,3 and temporarily replacing the damaged communication infrastructures within the disaster area4
and hence supporting public safety activities,5,6 in B5G networks.7,8
UAV-assisted network constitutes of an aerial access point providing the air to ground communication combine with
terrestrial network system and D2D communications offering wireless coverage between the functional and dysfunctional
areas.9 It can be used, for example in 5G or even beyond 5G network to manage specific requirement of mission criti-
cal communications such as disaster preparedness and disaster recovery.10,11 Connectivity analysis is one of the critical
success factors that enables highly reliable transmissions over long distances by Line of Sight (LoS) while guaranteeing
maximum cell coverage and improving energy efficiency.7 On the other hand, UAV energy efficiency can be achieved by
optimizing the trajectory and a blind beam tracking approach to minimize the total required to transmit power according
to the rate requirements of the SARs.12,13,14
Deploying a single UAV, however, will only support limited coverage for SARs due to the limited transmission distance.
Hence, collaboration from multi-UAV is needed to provide communication services to a larger area. Thus, this letter
proposes collaboration between multi-UAV and SARs and measure its performance based on the SAR elevation angle. We
started with analyzing and discussing recent work related to SAR and UAVs collaboration and summarizing it in Table 1.
Internet Technology Letters. 2024;7:e310. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/itl2 © 2021 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1 of 6
https://doi.org/10.1002/itl2.310
24761508, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/itl2.310 by UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL PAULISTA, Wiley Online Library on [07/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 of 6 SAIF et al.
T A B L E 1 Comparison of the proposed approach with related works

Highlighted Ref UAV IoT Data gather Optimal 𝜽
√ √
Full-duplex UAV relaying 5 × ×
√ √ √
Improving the level of public safety 7 ×
√ √
Real-time resource allocation 8 × ×
√ √ √
Reliable transmission and extend coverage 11 ×
√ √ √
Mobile communications from HAPs 12 ×
√ √ √ √
UAVs and SARs collaborate to improve the connectivity and QoS This work
FIGURE 1 System model
We then discuss the proposed model of multi-UAV and SARs collaboration to achieve tasks effectively and efficiently in
real time. Finally, we evaluate the proposed model in term of path loss, throughput, and coverage probability.
2 S Y ST E M MO D E L
In this letter, we consider multi-UAV to provide wireless coverage services during and after the disaster as shown in
Figure 1. The SARs are spatially distributed according to the homogeneous Poisson Point Processes (PPP) ΦSAR and inten-
sity 𝜌. UAVs are deployed at an altitude Hn and the static location (xn , yn , zn ) to provide wireless services to SARs. The
SARs are organized into SAR(xi , yi ), SAR(xj , yj ), SAR(xk , yk ). The SARs are having direct communication with the UAVs
that is, UAV1 , UAV2 and UAV3 . Here, the elevation angle for each SAR is linked with the UAVs in maximizing coverage
probability and reliable connectivity in disaster scenarios.
2.1 Path loss
It is assumed that the UAV coverage is circular with a diameter of 250 m. The distance between the UAVs and SAR for
each UAV in the coverage range is denoted as Ri , Rj , Rk and the elevation angles of SAR in the range of UAVs coverage are
𝜃i , 𝜃j and 𝜃k respectively. The distance between UAVs and lth active SAR shows as:
√
Rl,n = (UAVn − xl )2 + (UAVn − yl )2 + Hn2
SAIF et al. 3 of 6
where, l ∈ i, j, k SAR nodes and n = 1, 2, 3 are the UAV number. The probability of LoS link represent as a function of SAR
elevation angle 𝜃l and environment parameters a, b such that the LoS probability associated with ΦSAR nodes that served
by the UAVn are obtained as following.15
PLosl = (1 + ae−b (𝜃l −a) )−1 (1)
The path loss propagation is a critical factor affecting the wireless channel between UAVs and SAR through Air to Ground
(A-G) channel. Therefore, the path loss can be obtained from the following expression:
PL(dB) = FSPl + APLl (2)

4𝜋f R
where, FSPl = cc l,n , is free space path loss, fc is the carrier frequency, c is the light speed and Rl,n are (UAVs-SAR) dis-
tances. APLl = 𝜂LoS pLoS + 𝜂NLoS pNLoS are the propagation of free space additional loss which depend on the specific radio
environment.
2.2 Throughput
The data transmitted to lth SAR located in (xl , yl ) served By UAVn is denoted as follow:
( ( ))
1 𝜂LoS − 1
R(𝜃l , 𝜆l ) = 𝜆l Tl Wl log2 1 + ∑N pt + G3dB − FSPl − − 𝜂NLoS (3)
l=1 hl pl + 𝜎2 1 + ae−b (𝜃l −a)
BW
where, Tl is the effective data transmission time Wl = N ∫ Al f (xl ,yl )dxdy
is the bandwidth per SAR coverage, N is average
number of SAR in area Al . Reorganizing Equation (3), we will find the optimal value of 𝜃l is given as follows:
( ( ))
1 N hl pl + 𝜎 2 − FSPl + G3dB + pt − 𝜂LoS − 𝜂NLoS + 1
𝜃l = −1∕2 −2ba + ln (4)
b a2 (N hl pl + 𝜎 2 − FSPl + G3dB + pt − 𝜂NLoS )
2.3 Down link coverage probability
Coverage probability is the probability that received power is above a specified threshold. Hence, PCov = P[Pr,l ≥ pmin ]
where, Pr,l is the received signal power for SARs in area Al , Then, the coverage probability in the disaster area of the
proposed system model achieved by the SARs can be expressed as follows:
[ ] [ ]
pmin + PLdB − pt − GdB + 𝜂LoS pmin + PLdB − pt − GdB + 𝜂NLoS
Pcov,l = PLoS,l Q + (1 − PLoS,l ) Q (5)
𝜎LoS
2
𝜎NLoS
2
where, PLdB represents the path loss,GdB = 3dB represent the antenna gain and Q is the function of the LoS and
NLoS links and 𝜂LoS and 𝜂NLoS are the additional path losses for LoS or NLoS connection between SAR and the UAV
respectively.
3 NUMERICAL RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Simulation results are presented in this section to analyze the performance of the multi-UAV SAR collaborations in terms
of path loss, throughput, and coverage probability. The simulation parameters are as shown in Table 2.
The wireless signals from the UAV to the SAR in the downlink are modeled at an optimal elevation angle to obtain
the maximum throughput and coverage probability for various UAV altitudes.
4 of 6 SAIF et al.
T A B L E 2 Simulation parameters
E-parameter a b 𝜼LoS 𝜼NLoS Bandwidth AWGN power (𝝈 2 ) (UAV-SAR) distance Tx power fc
Urban 10.6 0.18 1 20 5 MHz −174 dBm (100-500) m 10 W 3.5 GHz
3.1 Analysis of the path loss
UAV air to ground channel will certainly affects the medium between UAV and the SARs. This can be seen from Figure 2
that the path loss performance was clearly affected by the UAV heights, that is as the UAV ascends to a higher altitude the
path loss increases though at the same time increasing the UAV coverage range. This is also an indication that the LoS
probability decreases due to the increased altitude. Further analysis shows that in an altitude H = 200 m, the maximum
path loss is measured to be 115 dB while the path loss is estimated to be 105 dB and 95 dB at H = 150 m, H = 100 m due
to the NLoS link that deteriorates the received SINR.
3.2 Throughput
Figure 3 demonstrates the effect of UAV altitudes on the throughput when the optimal elevation angle is varied. It can be
seen from the figure that the throughput is increasing when the optimal elevation angle increases for all UAV altitudes.
This is attributed to the fixed bandwidth utilization and low interference increment on the received SINR. The maximum
throughput for all UAV heights reaches 420.9 Mbps at the optimal elevation angles of 44.6◦ which leads to network stability
in the disaster area.
3.3 Coverage probability
Figure 4, shows the coverage probability performance vs SARs elevation angle at each UAV altitude. It can be observed
that the normalized coverage probability decreases with the increasing SAR elevation angle due to LoS and NLoS radio
propagation on the received signal. The trend continues due to reduced communication distance and increased elevation
angle between the UAV and SARs until it reaches elevation angle of around 25◦ at UAV1 H = 100 m, 35◦ at UAV1 H = 150 m
and 45◦ at UAV1 H = 200 m, respectively. Since then, the coverage probability started to increase as the SAR elevation
angle increases due to the improved LoS close to the UAVs via the distance of SARs that affect to the elevation angles.
FIGURE 2 SAR path loss vs distance

SAIF et al. 5 of 6
FIGURE 3 Throughput from SAR optimal elevation angle
FIGURE 4 Coverage probability from vs SAR elevation angle
4 CO N C LU S I O N
UAV is envisioned as a promising technology for disaster recovery management due to its high mobility features and easy
to deploy. Taking these on-board, this letter suggests a multi-UAV based network model to effectively manage disaster,
saving peoples’ lives, and reduce economic impact. With multi-UAV, we can also extend the network coverage. The per-
formance of the model is evaluated based on the SAR elevation angle. The results demonstrate that an increase of the
elevation angle leads to decreased path loss, increase in throughput and coverage probability. Our next step is to focus on
the energy efficiency of the multi-UAV and SAR collaboration.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Ireland’s European Structural and Investment Funds Programmers and the European Regional Development Fund,
2014-2020; Science Foundation Ireland (SFI), 16/RC/3918; European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation
program, 847577.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
6 of 6 SAIF et al.
ORCID
Abdu Saif https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6437-2116
Kaharudin Dimyati https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0186-3890
Kamarul Ariffin Noordin https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4003-4793
Saeed Hamood Alsamhi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2857-6979
Ammar Hawbani https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1069-3993
REFERENCES
1. Lyu J, Zeng Y, Zhang R. UAV-aided offloading for cellular hotspot. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun. 2018;17(6):3988-4001.
2. Saif A, Dimyati K, Noordin KA, Shah NSM, Abdullah Q, Mukhlif F. Unmanned aerial vehicles for post-disaster communication networks.
2020 IEEE 10th International Conference on System Engineering and Technology (ICSET). Malaysia: IEEE; 2020:273-277.
3. Alsamhi SH, Almalki F, Ma O, Ansari MS, Lee B. Predictive estimation of optimal signal strength from drones over IoT frameworks in
smart cities. IEEE Trans Mob Comput. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMC.2021.3074442.
4. Liu X, Li Z, Zhao N, Gui G, Chen Y, Adachi F. Transceiver design and multihop D2D for UAV IoT coverage in disasters. IEEE Internet
Things J. 2018;6(2):1803-1815.
5. Alsamhi SH, Ma O, Ansari MS, Gupta SK. Collaboration of drone and internet of public safety things in smart cities: an overview of qos
and network performance optimization. Drones. 2019;3(1):13.
6. Saif A, Dimyati K, Noordin KA, et al. Distributed clustering for user devices under UAV coverage area during disaster recovery. In: Shah
NSM, Alsamhi SH, Abdullah Q, Farah N, eds. 2021 IEEE International Conference in Power Engineering Application (ICPEA). Malaysia:
IEEE; 2021:143-148.
7. Alsamhi SH, Afghah F, Sahal R, et al. Green internet of things using UAVs in B5G networks: a review of applications and strategies. Ad
Hoc Networks. 2021; 117(102505):1-16.
8. Syed F, Gupta SK, Alsamhi SH, Rashid M, Liu X. A survey on recent optimal techniques for securing unmanned aerial vehicles
applications. Trans Emerg Telecommun Technol. 2020;32(7):e4133.
9. Wang H, Wang J, Ding G, Chen J, Li Y, Han Z. Spectrum sharing planning for full-duplex UAV relaying systems with underlaid D2D
communications. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun. 2018;36(9):1986-1999.
10. Alsamhi SH, Ma O, Ansari MS, Almalki FA. Survey on collaborative smart drones and internet of things for improving smartness of smart
cities. IEEE Access. 2019;7:128125-128152.
11. Saif A, Dimyati K, Noordin KA, et al. An efficient energy harvesting and optimal clustering technique for sustainable postdisaster
emergency communication systems. IEEE Access. 2021;9:78188-78202.
12. Li B, Fei Z, Zhang Y. UAV communications for 5G and beyond: recent advances and future trends. IEEE Internet Things J.
2018;6(2):2241-2263.
13. Lee SH, Guizani B, Kumar M, Qiao N, Liu X. Blockchain for decentralized multi-drone to combat covid-19. arXiv preprint. 2021;2021:1-19.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ett.4255.
14. Saif, A, Dimyati, K, Noordin, KA, et al. Unmanned aerial vehicle and optimal relay for extending coverage in post-disaster scenarios. arXiv
preprint 2021; arXiv:2104.06037.
15. Nguyen MN, Nguyen LD, Duong TQ, Tuan HD. Real-time optimal resource allocation for embedded UAV communication systems. IEEE
Wirel Commun Lett. 2018;8(1):225-228.
How to cite this article: Saif A, Dimyati K, Noordin KA, Alsamhi SH, Hawbani A. Multi-UAV and SAR
collaboration model for disaster management in B5G networks. Internet Technology Letters. 2024;7(1):e310.
https://doi.org/10.1002/itl2.310

Internet Technology Letters - 2021 - Saif - Multi UAV and SAR Collaboration Model For Disaster Management in B5G Networks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Internet Technology Letters - 2021 - Saif - Multi UAV and SAR Collaboration Model For Disaster Management in B5G Networks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Received: 8 April 2021 Revised: 14 June 2021 Accepted: 30 June 2021

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

Multi-UAV and SAR collaboration model for disaster

Abdu Saif1 Kaharudin Dimyati1 Kamarul Ariffin Noordin1

T A B L E 1 Comparison of the proposed approach with related works

FIGURE 1 System model

2.1 Path loss

PLosl = (1 + ae−b (𝜃l −a) )−1 (1)

PL(dB) = FSPl + APLl (2)

2.3 Down link coverage probability

3 NUMERICAL RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Urban 10.6 0.18 1 20 5 MHz −174 dBm (100-500) m 10 W 3.5 GHz

3.1 Analysis of the path loss

3.3 Coverage probability

FIGURE 2 SAR path loss vs distance

FIGURE 3 Throughput from SAR optimal elevation angle

FIGURE 4 Coverage probability from vs SAR elevation angle

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

You might also like