See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288798959

UAV based real time video surveillance over 4G

LTE

Conference Paper December 2015

DOI: 10.1109/ICOSST.2015.7396417

CITATIONS READS

6 554

3 authors:

Sameer Qazi Ali Shuja Siddiqui

PAF Karachi Institute of Economics & Techno Florida Institute of Technology
24 PUBLICATIONS 67 CITATIONS 5 PUBLICATIONS 7 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Asim Imdad Wagan

Mohammad Ali Jinnah University, Karachi, P
27 PUBLICATIONS 183 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

BioImaging View project

Deep Learning View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sameer Qazi on 30 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 UAV based Real Time Video Surveillance over 4G
LTE
Sameer Qazi1, Ali Shuja Siddiqui2 and Asim Imdad Wagan3
1.Department of Electrical Engineering, DHA Suffa University, Karachi, Pakistan
2. University of Texas at Arlington, Texas, USA
3. Department of Computer Science, National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan
s.qazi@dsu.edu.pk, alishuja@gmail.com, asim.imdad@nu.edu.pk

AbstractConstant video surveillance of remote locations in
rural areas, dense urbanized dwellings and strategic military
sites is of paramount interest to law enforcing agencies. Aerial
monitoring is now made possible by using dozens of camera
mounted UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) streaming video
from different vantage points to a single command and control
center. In this paper, we present an architecture for closed circuit
monitoring of such sites, which may consist of multiple indoor
and outdoor vantage points by using the legacy 4G LTE wireless
network cellular infrastructure in and around the buildings
consisting of several outdoor macro cells and indoor femto cells
to build a closed-circuit monitoring framework for streaming
real time video. Such a framework would lead to timely action in
crime or disaster prevention. We investigate the technical
performance of such a video streaming system using the metrics
of throughputs, loss rates and delay in relation to the physical
aspects of wireless propagation; multipath propagation loss,
shadowing and fading models.
KeywordsUAV, LTE, Wireless Propagation, Real Time Video
Streaming, Surveillance
infrastructure (Figure 1). This architecture consists of several
outdoor macro cells and indoor femto cells to build a closed-
circuit monitoring framework for streaming real time video.
The outdoor framework is a system of macrocells where
several camera mounted UAVs, in constant flight, referred to
as macroUEs in this work transmit real time video to their
respective macro base stations referred to as macroENBs in
this work. UE refers to mobile User Equipment and ENB
refers to Enhanced Node. The topology of our network and
associated terminologies are adapted from 3GPP R4-092042
standard. Similarly, indoor framework comprises of indoor
UAVs or Wireless IP cameras (homeUEs) transmitting real
time video to their respective indoor basestations
(HomeENBs). The video streams are concurrently sent to a
command and control center over Internet. Such a framework
would lead to timely action in crime or disaster prevention.

I. INTRODUCTION Our contributions in this work are as follows: (1) Proposal of a

two-tiered architecture for Real Time Building monitoring
Constant aerial video surveillance of remote locations is
using multi UAVs with vantage points both inside and outside
required in rural areas e.g. dams, crops, farms etc for natural
the building whose surveillance is to be carried out; (2)
disaster prevention e.g. floods and epidemics. Similarly, it is
Investigation of the technical performance metrics of such a
required in dense urbanized dwellings; high rise residential
multi-UAV real-time video streaming system using encoded
blocks and office towers for accident and terrorism prevention.
MP4 video format of real-time surveillance video; and (3)
Finally it is also required for the security of strategic military
Studying the effects of realistic wireless propagation scenarios
and nuclear sites. Unmanned aerial monitoring is now made
to study the effects of wireless signal distortion due to
possible by using dozens of camera mounted UAVs
multipath propagation and fading at practical UAV flying
(Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) such as quadcopters and
speeds (typical of urban settings) and signal propagation loss
unmanned gliders streaming video from different vantage
(shadowing loss) through multistory building structures. We
points of the location of interest to a single command and
use realistic UAV flight models for macro cells, consider
control center. Its application in the field of public safety
handover algorithms for seamless mobility and real frequency
communications has recently garnered attention of the
band (2.1 GHz) of communication of wireless nodes on board
researchers [1-2].
UAV under the 4G LTE standards. Finally, the work is
In this paper, we present a two tiered architecture for closed validated by simulations carried out in Network Simulator-3
circuit aerial monitoring of such sites, which may consist of (version 3.23) [3].
multiple indoor and outdoor vantage points by using the
The organization of this paper is as follows: Section II reviews
recently deployed 4G LTE wireless network cellular
related work in this field; Sections III and IV present brief
 Figure 1. Two tiered Building Surveillance System comprising of both Macro and Femto Cells.
tutorial of the different types of wireless propagation models
for signal propagation on wireless hops and mobility models
used for the UAVs. Section V describes the simulation
parameters used in this work; Section VI presents the
Performance Evaluation and Section VII finally concludes the
paper.
II. RELATED WORK
Becmezci et al. [4] identified the potential of Flying Adhoc
Networks (FANETs) in modern day applications their recent
survey paper. Many researchers have assumed simplistic LoS
propagation models in their research due to the high flying
altitudes of UAVs; however, recently Eckert et al. [5] have
identified new propagation models for newer class of
application possible with Aerial Adhoc Networks such as
inter-paraglider communication. Sahingoz [6-7] has recently
published two papers on research challenges of mobile
networking using multiple co-ordinating UAVs and posed
many interesting question on routing protocol suitability,
quality of service and UAV path planning; but does not
address the topic of propagation models. This paper is also a
step in these directions to answer some of these open
questions in a simulated environment with real propagation
models and routing protocol performance evaluation. Haibo et
al. [8] have addressed the Aerial Adhoc Networks nodes
placement as a quadratic unconstrained binary optimization
problem for maximum network connectivity, load balancing
and data transmission rates. However, the paper considers
UAVs are relay points in the sky for mobile nodes on ground
that cannot reach each other without the UAVs. In this paper
we do not address the problem of nodes on the ground and
consider all nodes to be airborne.
III. WIRELESS PROPAGATION MODELS USED
Unlike wired signal propagation which varies proportionally
as per distance according to a deterministic model, wireless
signal propagation has to undergo other challenges as well,
namely shadowing and multi-path propagation. Under Line of
Sight (LoS) signal propagation, the Friis propagation model is
used as shown below by Equation 1:
Pt Gt Gr 2
Pr (d ) = (1)
(4d ) 2
Pr ( d ) = Received power at distance d
Pt = Transmit power
Gt G r = Transmit and Receive Antenna Gains
However, when receiver and transmitter have no clear line of
sight, such as when wireless signal has to pass through
obstacles (such as walls) it is referred to as shadowing loss. If
the wireless signals sees intermittent reception of Line of Sight
Signal and reflected versions of signals from other obstacles it
is referred to as multipath propagation or fading. Here rapid
constructive and destructive interference between the LoS and
reflected versions of the signal cause rapid fluctuations in
received signal strength.
A. Shadowing Loss
The indoor wireless propagation model included in ns-3
includes Hybrid Buildings Propagation model. This model
combines Hata model, COST231, ITU-R P.1411 model (short
range communications) and ITU-R P.1238 (indoor
communications) model to evaluate the path loss under
different scenarios, The parameters used to model shadowing
loss are depicted in Table 1.
Table 1. Building Propagation Model Parameters
THRESHOLD FROM LOS TO NLOS
INTERNAL WALL LOSS
STANDARD DEV OF THE NORMAL DISTRIBUTION TO CALCULATE
SHADOWING DUE TO EXTERNAL WALLS
STANDARD DEV OF THE NORMAL DISTRIBUTION TO CALCULATE
SHADOWING FOR MACROUES
STANDARD DEV OF THE NORMAL DISTRIBUTION TO CALCULATE
SHADOWING FOR HOMEUES
B. Multipath Propagation Models and Fading
Trace based fading models are incorporated in ns-3 to simulate
fading at different speeds. We use the same model in this
work. For details the user can refer to ns-3 documentation.
IV. GAUSS MARKOV MOBILITY MODEL FOR MACROUES
We use the Gauss-Markov mobility model in this work
previously introduced by D. Broyles et al. [9] and J. Rohrer et
al. [10] to model the flight pattern of an actual real world
macrocell UAV (referred to as macroUE in this work). The
model updates speed, direction and pitch variables. The speed
and direction variable dictate the new speed and direction in
the x-y plane, and the third variable of pitch determines the
angle about the azimuth (or motion along z-axis); the
equations are given below (2-4):
s n = s n1 +(1 ) s + (1 2 ) s xn 1 (2)
n= n1+(1 ) + (1 2 ) x n 1
(3)
p n = p n 1 +(1 ) p + (1 ) p xn 1
2
(4)
where
is the tuning parameter ( = 1 makes the system memoryless
not typical of flight patterns), s, and p are average values of
speed, direction and pitch; s x 1 , x 1 and p x 1 are Gaussian
n n n
Random variables for randomness in new values selected
Table 2 shows the parameters used in our simulation to
simulate the macroUE flights.
Table 2. Gauss Markov Model Parameters to simulate
mobility of macroUEs
TIME STEP 0.5 SECONDS
ALPHA 0.85
MEAN VELOCITY VARIABLE 1-10 M/S
MEAN DIRECTION UNIFORM RV (MIN=0, MAX=6.28)
MEAN PITCH UNIFORM RV (MIN=0.05, MAX=0.05)
200 M
NORMAL VELOCITY GAUSSIAN RV (MEAN=0, VARIANCE=0, BOUND=0)
5 DB
NORMAL DIRECTION GAUSSIAN RV (MEAN=0, VAR=0.2, BOUND=0.4)
7
NORMAL PITCH GAUSSIAN RV(MEAN=0, VAR =0.02, BOUND=0.04)
8
5 In this work we assume that homeUEs are either fixed
wireless IP cameras fitted discreetly into rooms or miniature
UAVs which adopts a stationary resting position on a window
sill or cabinet to evade detection. Hence, we consider all
homeUEs as stationary in this study connected with their
basestations (access points). Connectivity to the remote hosts
is via the legacy internet connection of internet hosts inside
the building albeit over a secure connection. MacroUEs on the
other hand are considered mobile and may reconnect with
other macroENBs based on handover like in regular cellular
networks. Handover algorithms of macroUEs is based on the
maximum received signal from the Macrocell basestations.
V. SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT AND PARAMETERS
The simulations are carried out using NS-3 version 3.23
which is the most updated stable version of Network
Simulator as of now. The network topology is as per 3GPP
R4-092042 as outlined in Figure 1 considering both macro and
femtocells.
The parameters are described in complete detail in Table 3
shown below.
 Table 3. Simulation parameters as per 3GPP R4-092042
specification
APARTMENTS/ROOMS 4

FLOORS 4

FEMTOCELLS 2-8

MACROENB SITES 1-3

AREA MARGIN FACTOR 0.5

MACROUE DENSITY (NUMBER PER SQ METER) 0.00002

HOMEENB DEPLOYMENT RATIO 0.2

HOMEENB ACTIVATION RATIO 0.5

Figure 2. Two tiered Building Surveillance System comprising of both Macro

HOMEUES TO HOMEENB RATIO 1
and Femto Cells. The units of x and y axis are in meters

MACROUES/HOMEUES 10-20 / 2-10

MACROENB /HOMEENB TX POWER 46 / 20 DBM

MACROENB DLEARFCN / HOMEENB DLEARFCN 100

MACROENB ULEARFCN / HOMEENB ULEARFCN 18100

HOMEENB BANDWIDTH (IN TERMS OF RESOURCE 100

BLOCKS RBS)

MACROENB BANDWIDTH (IN TERMS OF RESOURCE 100

BLOCKS RBS)

NUMBERS OF BEARERS PER UE 1 Figure 3. Impact of number of Macrocells and mobility on Throughput of
MacroUEs
SRS PERIODICITY 80

SCHEDULER PROPORTIONAL

FAIR

VI. PEFORMANCE EVALUATION

Figure 2 shows an example radio environment map depicting
the femto-cells inside a typical building and a large 3-sector
macro-cell outside. In this figure, the building footprint
dimensions are of the electrical engineering laboratories block
building of the DHA Suffa University and the number of
floors are varied from one to three to determine the
performance of homeUEs. Similarly, the number of macro
cells are varied from one to three the determine the effect on Figure 4. Impact of number of Femtocells and building size on Throughput of
throughput when the mobility of the macroUEs (onboard HomeUEs
UAVs) are varied.
We obtained four short MPEG-4 encoded videos of the
surveillance recordings of of the buildings and used a trace
based simulation to stream these videos using the Evalvid
server-client application for ns-3 developed by GERCOM
Group [11]. However, two modification were made by us; in
the original GERCOM code the video is streamed from remote
hosts to the macroUEs/homeUES and macroUEs used a
random waypoint mobility model. In our situation, the videos
are streamed from the macroUE/homeUE to a remote host
and the macroUEs use the Gauss-Markov model as explained
earlier.
A. Impact of number of Macrocells and mobility on
Throughput of MacroUEs
Under our simulation settings the number of macroUEs are
varied from 10-20 and homeUEs are varied from 2-10 based
on the number of macrocells and femtocells we select in our
simulation scenario. When the macro UEs are stationary, the
combined throughput of macroUEs is on average about 600
kbps when the number of macrocells are varied from one to
three.
When the mobility is considered at typical surveillance speeds
of 1- 5 m/s, the combined throughput is drops by 2/3rd of this
value. The number of macrocells have a direct impact on
mobility. The performance is better at high macroUE speeds
as the number of macrocells increases. However, this
difference is not very high, since UAVs used for surveillance
typically fly at lower speeds in a limited flying area. Figure 3
depicts the results of this study.
B. Impact of number of Femtocells and building parameters
on Throughput of HomeUEs
Under our simulation settings, the number of homeUEs are
varied from 2-10, based on the number of femtocells.
HomeUEs are considered stationary as described before. The
building internal wall loss is 5dB.
When the number of femtocells in relation to the number of
the floors of the building is increased (Figure 4), keeping the
building footprint constant, the combined throughput of
homeUEs increases from linear (number of floors=1) to
exponential trend (number of floors = 2 & 3).
VII. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we have investigated the effects on network
performance in terms of data throughputs that can be possible
View publication stats
in Aerial UAV based building surveillance networks in a
simulated environment but with realistic propagation and
mobility models encountered in real world UAV based
environments. This research area is fairly new only maturing
over the last 5 years and this work has tried to answer some of
the unanswered research questions and open challenges posed
by previous researchers. As future work, we can consider
other propagation environments and presence of both real time
and non-real time traffic [12].
REFERENCES
[1] A. Merwaday, A. and I. Guvenc, UAV assisted heterogeneous
networks for public safety communications, in Proceedings of IEEE
Wireless Communications and Netwrking Conference Workshops, pp.
329-334, New Orleans, LA, March 2015
[2] Mike, Ohleger; Geoffrey G Xie and John H. Gibson, Extending UAV
Video Dissemination via Seamless Handover: A Proof of Concept
Evaluation of the IEEE 802.21 Standard, in Proceedings of Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 5106-5114, USA,
January 2013
[3] NS-3 Network Simulator; http://www.nsnam.org, July 2014
[4] Ilker Bekmezci, Ozgur Koray Sahinggoz and Samil Temel, Flying Ad-
Hoc Networks (FANETs): A survey, Adhoc Networks, Ad Hoc
Networks 11 (2013) 12541270, Elsevier
[5] J. Eckert, J., D. Eckhoff ;R. German, R. A deterministic radio
propagation model for inter-paraglider communication, in Proceedings,
11th Annual Conference on Wireless On-demand Network Systems and
Services (WONS), 2014
[6] Ozgur Koray Sahingoz, Mobile Networking with UAVs: Opportunities
andChallenges, in Proceedings of International Conference of
Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Atlanta, Georgia, May 2013
[7] Ozgur Koray Sahingoz, Networking Models in Flying Ad-Hoc
Networks (FANETs): Concepts and Challenges in J Intell Robot Syst
(2014) 74:513527, DOI 10.1007/s10846-013-9959-7, SPRINGER
[8] Haibo Wang, Da Huo and Bahram Alidaee, Position Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles in the Mobile Ad Hoc Network, in J Intell Robot Syst (2014)
74:455464, DOI 10.1007/s10846-013-9939-y, SPRINGER
[9] D. Broyles, A. Jabbar and J.P.G. Sterbenz, Design and Analyis of a 3-D
gauss-markov mobility model for highly-dynamic air bourne networks
in Proceedings of International Telemetering Conference, ITC, San
Deigo, October 2010
[10] Justin P. Rohrer, Egemen K, Cetinkaya, Hemanth Narra, Dan Broyles,
Kevin Peters and James P.G Sterbenz, AeroRP Performance in Highly-
Dynamic Airborne networks using 3D Gauss Markov Mobility model,
in Proceeding MILCOM 2011
[11] GERCOM, http://www.gercom.ufpa.br/
[12] A. Zaman and S. Qazi, On the impact of Transport Layer mechanisms
on routing protocols in MANETS, in 2013 IEEE Malaysia International
Conference on Communications (MICC) 2013