Wireless Mesh Node Location Optimization via Ranging

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Optimizing the location of a particularly important node in a wireless mesh network to ensure fluent communications across the network, which is challenging due to unique factors in each space and changing signal propagation conditions over time.

Innovation Solution

A method that involves instructing existing nodes to transmit ranging messages with an indicator of cumulative communications quality, collecting and comparing hop count values or other indicators to determine the optimal location for the important node, which can be automated and scalable.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Device complexity

If a generally valid rule for selecting node location is used, then device complexity is reduced, but communication fluency deteriorates due to unique factors in each space

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenode location selection complexityVSAvoidcommunication fluency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-diagnosis and self-optimization by automatically measuring communication quality metrics and selecting optimal node locations without requiring manual configuration or expert knowledge. The controlling device autonomously executes the optimization method, making the system self-sufficient in adapting to its specific environmental conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts the node location based on measured communication parameters such as signal strength, hop count, and communication quality indicators. By changing the location parameter according to actual performance data rather than fixed rules, the system optimizes communication fluency for each unique space.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Ease of operation

If node location is fixed based on initial configuration, then ease of operation is improved, but adaptability deteriorates when signal propagation conditions change over time

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenode configuration simplicityVSAvoidresponse to changing conditions
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system transitions from static node location configuration to dynamic optimization. The node location is no longer fixed but is continuously or periodically re-optimized based on current communication conditions, allowing the system to adapt to changing signal propagation characteristics while maintaining operational simplicity through automation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements a feedback mechanism where communication quality metrics are continuously measured and fed back to the controlling device, which then adjusts node locations accordingly. This closed-loop control enables the system to respond to changing conditions automatically, maintaining both ease of operation and high adaptability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If manual optimization method is used for each unique space, then communication fluency is improved, but loss of time increases due to repeated manual interventions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecommunication fluencyVSAvoidoptimization time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary optimization by pre-calculating and storing optimal node locations for different scenarios. When deployment occurs, the system can quickly retrieve and apply pre-determined optimal configurations based on measured communication metrics, avoiding the need for time-consuming manual trial-and-error optimization in each unique space.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical optimization processes with an automated electronic system. The controlling device uses software algorithms to measure communication metrics, analyze data, and determine optimal node locations automatically, substituting human manual intervention with an automated computational system that operates faster and more consistently.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Manufacturing precision

If comprehensive communication quality measurement is performed, then manufacturing precision of node placement is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenode placement precisionVSAvoidmeasurement system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses existing multi-functional nodes that can both communicate network data and measure communication quality metrics. The same wireless communication infrastructure serves dual purposes: normal network operation and optimization measurement, eliminating the need for separate dedicated measurement devices and reducing overall system complexity while maintaining high placement precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentEP3442177B1Method and arrangement for optimising the location of a node in a mesh network
Publication Date: 2020.10.07 HELVAR OY AB
  • EP3442177B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP3442177B1 patent drawingFigure 3~4
  • EP3442177B1 patent drawingFigure 5~6

AI summary

A method for selecting a location for a particularly important node of a wireless mesh network comprises instructing existing individual nodes of the wireless mesh network to transmit ranging messages. A ranging message contains an identifier of an originator of the ranging message and a value of an indicator of cumulative communications quality. The method comprises collecting values of said indicator that said number of existing individual nodes have received in ranging messages, and comparing nodes with respect to what kind of values of said indicator other nodes received in ranging messages that originated from the compared nodes. The location for the particularly important node is selected to coincide with the location of that one of the compared nodes that was the originator of ranging messages in which the received values of the indicator indicated best cumulative communications quality.