★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★Open research. Global perspectives.
editor@theamericanjournals.comPublisher Home ↗
Applied Sciences OPEN ACCESS

A Model for Minimizing Packet Loss Probability Considering the Environmental Coefficient in Observation Wells

Memonova Gulrukh Nazrikulovna
Karshi State Technical University, Karshi, Uzbekistan
DOI Crossref DOI 10.37547/tajas/Volume08Issue05-40
tajas 2026
VOL. 8 / NO. 5 MAY
FULL TEXT PP. 292-298
DOWNLOAD PDF

View all articles in this issue ↗

VOLUME 8
ISSUE 5
YEAR 2026
PAGES 292-298
RESEARCH OVERVIEW

Abstract

Reliable, low-loss delivery of data packets is one of the basic requirements for any LoRa-based remote monitoring network installed at groundwater observation wells. This paper looks at what actually governs packet transmission efficiency in such networks, paying particular attention to the physical environment inside the observation well itself — the well casing, the burial depth of the sensor, the water column above it, and the condition of the cap all attenuate the radio signal in ways that a generic outdoor LoRa link does not experience. The links between signal attenuation, background noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), packet loss and transmission reliability are analyzed, and a simplified model is proposed that adds an observation-well environment coefficient, K_q, to the standard distance-based path-loss equation. To see whether the coefficient actually helps in practice, network reliability was compared for two cases over twelve ten-day observation periods between December 2025 and March 2026: a baseline case that ignores the well environment (R_0) and the proposed case that accounts for it (R_1). In every one of the twelve periods, R_1 came out roughly 2.0–2.5 percentage points higher than R_0, with packet loss falling by a comparable margin. This gives a concrete, measurable basis for reducing packet loss in LoRa-based observation-well monitoring networks by taking the well environment into account rather than treating every deployment as if it were the same.

RESEARCH TOPICS

Keywords

LoRa technology observation well groundwater monitoring

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
SOURCES & SCHOLARSHIP

References

  1. F. Adelantado, X. Vilajosana, P. Tuset-Peiro, B. Martinez, J. Melia-Segui, and T. Watteyne, “Understanding the Limits of LoRaWAN,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 55, no. 9, pp. 34–40, 2017, doi: 10.1109/MCOM.2017.1600613.
  2. F. Van den Abeele, J. Haxhibeqiri, I. Moerman, and J. Hoebeke, “Scalability Analysis of Large-Scale LoRaWAN Networks in ns-3,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 2186–2198, 2017, doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2017.2768498.
  3. L. Vangelista, “Frequency Shift Chirp Modulation: The LoRa Modulation,” IEEE Signal Processing Letters, vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 1818–1821, 2017.
  4. B. Reynders, Q. Wang, P. Tuset-Peiro, X. Vilajosana, and S. Pollin, “Improving Reliability and Scalability of LoRaWANs Through Lightweight Scheduling,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1830–1842, 2018, doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2018.2815150.
  5. D. Croce, M. Gucciardo, S. Mangione, G. Santaromita, and I. Tinnirello, “Impact of LoRa Imperfect Orthogonality: Analysis of Link-Level Performance,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 22, pp. 796–799, 2018, doi: 10.1109/LCOMM.2018.2797057.
  6. D. Magrin, M. Capuzzo, and A. Zanella, “A Thorough Study of LoRaWAN Performance Under Different Parameter Settings,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 116–127, 2020, doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2019.2946487.
  7. J. Finnegan, R. Farrell, and S. Brown, “Analysis and Enhancement of the LoRaWAN Adaptive Data Rate Scheme,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 7171–7180, 2020, doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2020.2982745.
  8. R. Marini, W. Cerroni, and C. Buratti, “A Novel Collision-Aware Adaptive Data Rate Algorithm for LoRaWAN Networks,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 2670–2680, 2021, doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2020.3020189.
  9. G. G. M. de Jesus, R. D. Souza, C. Montez, and A. S. Hoeller, “LoRaWAN Adaptive Data Rate With Flexible Link Margin,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 6053–6061, 2021, doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2020.3033797.
  10. A. Petroni and M. Biagi, “Interference Mitigation and Decoding Through Gateway Diversity in LoRaWAN,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 21, no. 11, pp. 9068–9081, 2022, doi: 10.1109/TWC.2022.3172629.
  11. D. Davronbekov, J. Aripov, Sh. Jabbarov, R. Djuraev, and D. Matkurbonov, "Influence of Packet Switching and Routing Methods on the Reliability of the Data Transmission Network and the Application of Artificial Neural Networks," in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 13741, IHCI 2022, Tashkent, Uzbekistan, 2022, pp. 284–296, doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-27199-1_29.
  12. H. Khujamatov, D. Davronbekov, A. Khayrullaev, M. Abdullaev, M. Mukhiddinov, and J. Cho, "ERIRMS: Evaluation of the Reliability of IoT-Aided Remote Monitoring Systems of Low-Voltage Overhead Transmission Lines," Sensors, vol. 24, no. 18, art. 5970, 2024, doi: 10.3390/s24185970.
  13. G. Memonova, P. Schmidt, J. Tursunov, and G. Gofurova, "Automated Groundwater Monitoring System with Real-Time Data Collection and Analysis Using LoRa and GSM Technologies," in Proc. 16th Int. Sci. Pract. Conf. Environment. Technology. Resources., Rezekne, Latvia, 2025, vol. IV, pp. 209–215, doi: 10.17770/etr2025vol4.8412.
  14. G. N. Memonova, "Enhancing Water Reservoir Management with LoRa Wireless Technology," Muhammad al-Xorazmiy Avlodlari (Descendants of Muhammad al-Khwarizmi), Sci.-Pract. Inf.-Anal. J., no. 4(26), pp. 140–143, Dec. 2023, ISSN 2181-9211.