Table 2.
Performance reported for BLE mesh network academic solutions.
| Proposal | Multi-Hop Paradigm | Evaluation Platform | Performance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metrics | Results/Conclusion | |||
| [9] | Trickle + gossiping | nRF51822 SoC based on ARM Cortex M0 | Latency | 20 s (3 hops) |
| Node lifetime | 589 days (6000 mAh battery, 5% duty cycle) | |||
| [10] | Bounded flooding | TI CC2540 | Packet overhead | 16 packets (BLEmesh), 25 packets (source routing), 96 packets (flooding) Note: packet transmission over 5 hops |
| [11] | Tree-based routing | TI CC2540, SMARTF05 EB | Latency | 1.0 s (1 hop), 1.3 s (2 hops), 2.1 s (3 hops) |
| Node lifetime | 202 days (peripheral), 60 days (central with 3 connected peripherals) Note: connInterval = 500 ms | |||
| [12] | Static routing | X-NUCLEO-IDB05A1 (STM) | Latency | <0.35 s (5 hops) |
| [13] | On-demand routing | TI CC2540 | Latency | 25 s (first packet), 0.79 s (rest of packets) Note: 22-byte packet over 3 hops |
| [14,15] | DAG-based routing | Smartphone | PDR | 98.8% (512-byte file, 5-hop path) |
| Latency | 2.09 s (2 hops), 2.90 s (3 hops), 3.54 s (4 hops), 4.00 s (5 hops) | |||
| Avg. current consumption | 210.9 mA (sender), 228.7 mA (receiver), 234.6 mA (relay) Note: 10-100 kB file transmission | |||
| [16] | On-demand routing | Broadcom BCM434x (iPhone 6) | Throughput | ~6 kbit/s (10-node network) |
| Latency | <5 s (10-node network) | |||
| [17] | Named Data Networking | S130 Nordic, TI CC2540, custom prototype | N/A | N/A |
| [18] | DAG-based routing | MSP430 microcontroller, TI CC2420, Broadcom BCM4356 | PDR | ~100% (connInterval = 50 ms) ~80% (connInterval = 200 ms) |
| Comparison with IEEE 802.15.4 | BLE mesh network provides greater PDR, lower number of parent changes and lower overhead | |||
| Impact of ECI metric | Greater PDR (~100%) and lower parent changes than without ECI | |||