Limits...
Cross Layer Adaptation of Check intervals in low power listening MAC protocols for lifetime improvement in Wireless Sensor Networks.

Escolar S, Chessa S, Carretero J, Marinescu MC - Sensors (Basel) (2012)

Bottom Line: We propose Cross Layer Adaptation of Check intervals (CLAC), a novel protocol intended to reduce the energy consumption of the nodes without significantly increasing the delay.CLAC uses routing and MAC layer information to compute a delay that matches the packet arrival time.The simulation results confirm that CLAC improves the network lifetime at no additional packet loss and without affecting the end-to-end delay.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Computer Science Department, University Carlos III of Madrid, Avda. Universidad 30, Madrid 28911, Spain. mariasoledad.escolar@uc3m.es

ABSTRACT
Preamble sampling-based MAC protocols designed for Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) are aimed at prolonging the lifetime of the nodes by scheduling their times of activity. This scheduling exploits node synchronization to find the right trade-off between energy consumption and delay. In this paper we consider the problem of node synchronization in preamble sampling protocols. We propose Cross Layer Adaptation of Check intervals (CLAC), a novel protocol intended to reduce the energy consumption of the nodes without significantly increasing the delay. Our protocol modifies the scheduling of the nodes based on estimating the delay experienced by a packet that travels along a multi-hop path. CLAC uses routing and MAC layer information to compute a delay that matches the packet arrival time. We have implemented CLAC on top of well-known routing and MAC protocols for WSN, and we have evaluated our implementation using the Avrora simulator. The simulation results confirm that CLAC improves the network lifetime at no additional packet loss and without affecting the end-to-end delay.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Connectivity of BoX-MAC and CLAC in a 10-node (left) and in a 20-node (right) linear topologies.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3472841&req=5

f7-sensors-12-10511: Connectivity of BoX-MAC and CLAC in a 10-node (left) and in a 20-node (right) linear topologies.

Mentions: We illustrate this issue in Figure 7 by showing the connectivity of CLAC against the connectivity of BoX-MAC for each of the experiments. We measure connectivity by counting the number of nodes successfully linked to a parent. On the left hand side we show the results for a 10-node linear topology using different values of DC and p. We observe that for low values of DC (between 1% and 10%) the network is not totally connected for either protocols. For values of DC equal to 20% the network is connected only for the two smallest values of p (−1 and 1), while for the two largest values of p none of the networks is connected. For values of DC greater than 20% all of the nodes in the network successfully find a valid route to the sink regardless of the strategy. We observe that connectivity is directly proportional to the duty cycle: the larger is the DC, the higher is the connectivity. For negative values of p we effectively increase the DC since we reduce the check interval and, as a result, we improve the connectivity with respect to BoX-MAC. On the contrary, for large values of p and small DC, the connectivity is low. This is because increasing DC increases the probability of receiving beacon messages, since the beacon messages are sent at arbitrary times (even at times different from the scheduled time for sending the data); when DC is low the beacons may not be received and, consequently, routes may not be determined. The right hand side of Figure 7 shows the connectivity for BoX-MAC and CLAC for a 20-nodes linear topology. The graphic shows a similar trend as the 10-node case. We can observe that the increase in network size results in a lower connectivity in CLAC (for DC ≤ 20%). It is also interesting to note that the increase of DC, when p = −1, does not guarantee total network connectivity.


Cross Layer Adaptation of Check intervals in low power listening MAC protocols for lifetime improvement in Wireless Sensor Networks.

Escolar S, Chessa S, Carretero J, Marinescu MC - Sensors (Basel) (2012)

Connectivity of BoX-MAC and CLAC in a 10-node (left) and in a 20-node (right) linear topologies.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3472841&req=5

f7-sensors-12-10511: Connectivity of BoX-MAC and CLAC in a 10-node (left) and in a 20-node (right) linear topologies.
Mentions: We illustrate this issue in Figure 7 by showing the connectivity of CLAC against the connectivity of BoX-MAC for each of the experiments. We measure connectivity by counting the number of nodes successfully linked to a parent. On the left hand side we show the results for a 10-node linear topology using different values of DC and p. We observe that for low values of DC (between 1% and 10%) the network is not totally connected for either protocols. For values of DC equal to 20% the network is connected only for the two smallest values of p (−1 and 1), while for the two largest values of p none of the networks is connected. For values of DC greater than 20% all of the nodes in the network successfully find a valid route to the sink regardless of the strategy. We observe that connectivity is directly proportional to the duty cycle: the larger is the DC, the higher is the connectivity. For negative values of p we effectively increase the DC since we reduce the check interval and, as a result, we improve the connectivity with respect to BoX-MAC. On the contrary, for large values of p and small DC, the connectivity is low. This is because increasing DC increases the probability of receiving beacon messages, since the beacon messages are sent at arbitrary times (even at times different from the scheduled time for sending the data); when DC is low the beacons may not be received and, consequently, routes may not be determined. The right hand side of Figure 7 shows the connectivity for BoX-MAC and CLAC for a 20-nodes linear topology. The graphic shows a similar trend as the 10-node case. We can observe that the increase in network size results in a lower connectivity in CLAC (for DC ≤ 20%). It is also interesting to note that the increase of DC, when p = −1, does not guarantee total network connectivity.

Bottom Line: We propose Cross Layer Adaptation of Check intervals (CLAC), a novel protocol intended to reduce the energy consumption of the nodes without significantly increasing the delay.CLAC uses routing and MAC layer information to compute a delay that matches the packet arrival time.The simulation results confirm that CLAC improves the network lifetime at no additional packet loss and without affecting the end-to-end delay.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Computer Science Department, University Carlos III of Madrid, Avda. Universidad 30, Madrid 28911, Spain. mariasoledad.escolar@uc3m.es

ABSTRACT
Preamble sampling-based MAC protocols designed for Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) are aimed at prolonging the lifetime of the nodes by scheduling their times of activity. This scheduling exploits node synchronization to find the right trade-off between energy consumption and delay. In this paper we consider the problem of node synchronization in preamble sampling protocols. We propose Cross Layer Adaptation of Check intervals (CLAC), a novel protocol intended to reduce the energy consumption of the nodes without significantly increasing the delay. Our protocol modifies the scheduling of the nodes based on estimating the delay experienced by a packet that travels along a multi-hop path. CLAC uses routing and MAC layer information to compute a delay that matches the packet arrival time. We have implemented CLAC on top of well-known routing and MAC protocols for WSN, and we have evaluated our implementation using the Avrora simulator. The simulation results confirm that CLAC improves the network lifetime at no additional packet loss and without affecting the end-to-end delay.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus