i want to do a simulation on IoT sensors in ns3. does ns3 has any specific sensors such as temp sensor or other sensors? or it just specifies as sensor nodes?
There are no IoT-type sensor classes in ns-3 at the moment, but it appears there was desire for such functionality in 2013.
As an aside, ns-3 is a network simulator. It's not meant to simulate specific devices – rather, it simulates the network traffic of devices. If you can determine the traffic pattern of a device, than you can build an Application that generates this type of traffic, and install that Application on a Node. You may find inspiration for how to wrap your own Application by looking at the existing Applications. You might also be able to mimic the traffic pattern of IoT devices using an existing Application.
Related
I know this is not directly programming related, but is there a way to purposely limit the signal strength on a testing mobile device to determine how your app performs under weak signal conditions?
I have an app that streams video and audio to a server, and need to test how it performs in low signal areas.. Any suggestions please?
One realistic way to do it is put it in a weak Faraday cage. You can make one or buy a bag or other pre-manufactured cage that protects against radio transmissions. As long as it's not too strong, it should weaken but not completely block the signal.
you can use a software like network link conditioner on OSX and netlimiter on windows, they have options for bandwidth limiting and even packet loss and presets for different typical situations plus the ability to create some yourself, you can just create a wifi network on your machine and connect to it from the device you want to test
please not that iOS has network link conditioner built-in (you can find it under the developer menu in settings), while android may have something on a rooted device (never tried anything though)
If run run your app in a simulator, many have options for emulating poor signal conditions.
There is at least one open source project whose aim is to simulate different network conditions for exactly the type of testing you are describing:
https://github.com/facebook/augmented-traffic-control
This can work in a cellular network but in this would most likely require your own base stations etc. This is possible via other open source projects (e.g. http://openbsc.osmocom.org/trac/), but is likely not necessary as you can probably simulate the same affect with the WiFi test set up.
How can I connect and use multiple Kinect sensors (v2.0) with MS Kinect SDK on the same PC?
You can't. The official Microsoft SDK only supports one Kinect an the same PC.
The open source driver (libfreenect2) supports multiple Kinects on the same PC, but doesn't have skeletal tracking.
But you can run each Kinect on its own PC and stream the data to one central processing PC. There are multiple projects going that direction:
KV2Streamer allows you to stream all Kinect data (including skeletal tracking) from one PC to another.
LiveScan3D builds point clouds out of the data of multiple Kinects connect over LAN. They don't include the skeletal tracking data yet, but they said they are working on including it. They also take care of the calibration for you, so all Kinects work in the same coordinate system.
There is also Micorsoft's RoomAliveToolkit that builds an augmented reality using multiple Kinects and multiple projectors.
I need to write a number of drivers for both HID USB devices as well as some old serial devices. The drivers are to pull data off the device and then send the data over to an application that then consumes it. Since the Apple Docs mention that a lot of USB and HID communication can be done from the user space I had assumed that I would not need to write a kernel extension, at least not for the HID devices. Could some one tell me a more solid way to determine this?
Thanks!
If you're writing a single application that must talk to one or more USB HID devices you may well find you can just access the devices straight from the application using the application-level USB APIs.
A kernel driver would be more for something like a networking or mass storage device that needed to integrate with the kernel to be be available to multiple applications.
This Apple document Common QA and Roadmap for USB Software Development on Mac OS X goes into some detail on the matter and links to example code too.
i am working on a project, where i would like to install an embedded system in a certain location , the system is provided with a camera , the system has to perform image processing functions on the images obtained from the camera.
The system must be attached with gps and gsm modules.
i am in the process of choosing the hardware needed, i am thinking of using a beagle board or FPGA , which one is more suitable for my application ? do you recommend other boards? do you know any gsm or gps modules that can be interfaced with these modules?
Thank you
If your image processing algorithms are too CPU intensive I'll suggest you consider FPGAs. Otherwise, Beagle board is fine.
What is the interface to your camera? USB / FireWire / I2C / other? If the Beagle Board supports what you need, and can handle the processing, that's probably the easiest way to go - FireWire and USB interfaces are not exactly trivial to do on an FPGA, unless you can get a board and a matching Linux distro for it, where everything is configured and working out of the box (and it's probably going to be expensive then...).
GPS modules typically connect over a simple serial connection, so that shouldn't be an issue for either solution.
I am working on Xilinx Spartan 3E platform, using this development board:
http://www.xilinx.com/products/boards-and-kits/HW-SPAR3E-SK-US-G.htm
My program operates on certain data and then provides output. I wish to transfer the input signals externally. The input data is a stream of 8-bit signals.
So, how do I send the input signals from my laptop to the FPGA via USB? Does Xilinx support this or is there standard software to do this?
Thanks.
It sounds like you are describing a uart more than a native USB interface. You can get a USB to logic level serial adapter that will let you easily transfer data to and from a Pc at up to 921.6k baud. A uart/serial port is easy to implement in the Fpga and PCs are easy to use with serial ports.
Here is the cable:
http://www.ftdichip.com/Products/Cables/USBTTLSerial.htm
If you have a development card it is very possible this type of interface is present.
On the software side you can use your programming language of choice as if it was interfacing with a seal port or use a terminal program like hyper terminal or Download teraterm http://ttssh2.sourceforge.jp/
Updated response:
100Hz is not a hard interface to make. At that rate you should use the serial interface if at all possible. The board you referenced has 2 full RS-232 connections. At that point you only need a way to connect that to your computer. If you have a PC with RS-232 connectors you only need a cable if you have a newer computer without you need a RS-232 to USB translator cable (like this one: http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=768-1014-ND or google rs232 usb). This will give you a virtual com port on the pc to interface with the previously mentioned terminal programs or your custom software.
Update 2:
on the resource tab of the development board page you linked to there are several UART based fpga designs that you should be able to use as a starting point.
i.e. the "PicoBlaze Processor SPI Flash Programmer".
That board doesn't provide easy access to the USB interface from the FPGA as far as I can tell. It's just for configuration and debug.
Some of the newer boards and tools do allow something called hardware-in-the-loop testing where the simulator can upload data to the FPGA, wait it to calculate the results and then pull the data back. This is relatively common when using Xilinx's System Generator product as the simulations can be really long.
But I think with that board you'd be better off using the on board RS232 port to get data to and from the board. You will have to build the infrastructure to do it yourself though.
This may also give you some ideas:
http://www.1pin-interface.com/