**3.4 Results obtained from movement model changes**

In this section, a movement model is presented in the basic scenario changes, and the simulation is implemented for stop times of 30, 120, 600 and 900 s. These implementations provide an interval between discrete simulation (no stop time) and static simulation (stop time of 900).

Figure 10 shows energy consumption with seven protocols. DSR shows the best result and TORA shows the worst result. For on-demand protocols, i. e., TORA, AODV, DSR and CBRP, we see considerable changes in energy consumption in the change in movement model [Cano. J. C et al 2000]; however, the energy consumption of table-driven protocols is not related to the movement model and keeps its state, in contrast to on-demand protocols [Sargolzaey. H et al 2009]. In this simulation, TORA shows the worst result due to its assembly of IMEP§ and TORA packets [Prakash. Sh et al 2011]. According to this scenario, it is observed that DSR and AODV have shown relatively similar behaviour in static networks, but when the movement of nodes is stable (low stop time), their behaviour will be different. In this movement model, DSR (using a caching mechanism as well as irregular nodes technique) and AODV (due to having low parasite during sending route detection packets) could have shown the best result [Gupta. A. K et al 2010].

Figure 11 shows results obtained by varying the maximum speed of nodes between 0, 1, 15 and 25 m/s. These values have been considered, respectively, as simulating a fixed network, a network for pedestrians, a network for cyclists, a network for drivers and a network for train travellers. The obtained results show fixed behaviour of DSDV even in movement with high speed but energy consumption has increased for four on-demand protocols with regard to increase in maximum speed of movement. Generally, when speed is added, DSDV is better than AODV [Liu. Y et al 2004].
