Comparing Energy-Saving MAC Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks
Applications for wireless sensor networks have notably different characteristics and requirements from standard WLAN applications. Low energy consumption is the most important consideration. The low message rate that is typical for sensor network applications and the relaxed latency requirements allow for significant reductions in energy consumption of the radio. In this article we study the energy saved by two MAC protocols optimized for wireless sensor networks, S-MAC and T-MAC, in comparison to standard CSMA/CA, We also report on the effects of low-power listening, a physical layer optimization, in combination with these MAC protocols. The comparison is based on extensive simulation driven by traffic that varies over time and location; sensor nodes are inactive unless they observe some physical event, or send status updates to the sink node providing the connection to the wired world. T-MAC} in combination with low-power listening saves most energy, but can not handle the same peak loads as CSMA/CA and S-MAC.
Keywordsmedium access control energy efficiency idle listening duty cycle simulation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- V. Bharghavan, A. Demers, S. Shenker and L. Zhang, MACAW: A media access protocol for wireless LAN’s, in: Conf. on Communications Architectures, Protocols and Applications (London, August 1994) pp. 212–225.Google Scholar
- T. van Dam and K. Langendoen, An adaptive energy-efficient MAC protocol for wireless sensor networks, in: 1st ACM Conf. on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys 2003), (Los Angeles, CA, November 2003) pp. 171–180.Google Scholar
- J. Kahn, R. Katz and K. Pister, Next century challenges: Mobile networking for “Smart Dust”, in: 5th ACM/IEEE Int. Conf. on Mobile Computing and Networks (Mobicom ‘99), (Seatle, WA, August 1999) pp. 271–278.Google Scholar
- A. Mainwaring, J. Polastre, R. Szewczyk, D. Culler and J. Anderso, Wireless sensor networks for habitat monitoring, in; First ACM Int. Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Application (WSNA) (Atlanta, GA, September 2002) pp. 88–97.Google Scholar
- LAN MAN Standards Committee of the IEEE Computer Society, IEEE Std 802.11–1999, Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) specifications. IEEE, 1999.Google Scholar
- RFM, TR1001 868.35 MHz Hybrid Tranceiver.Google Scholar
- Texas Instruments, MSP430x1xx Family User’s Guide. SLAU049B.Google Scholar
- Y. Tseng, C. Hsu and T. Hsieh, Power-saving protocols for IEEE 802.11-based multi-hop ad hoc networks, in: 21st Conf. of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM) 1 (June 2002) vol. 1, pp. 200–209.Google Scholar
- A. Varga, The OMNeT++ discrete event simulation system, in: European Simulation Multiconference (ESM’2001) (Prague, Czech Republic, June 2001).Google Scholar
- W. Ye, J. Heidemann and D. Estrin, An energy-efficient MAC protocol for wireless sensor networks, in: 21st Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM), 3 (June 2002) vol. 3, pp. 1567–1576.Google Scholar
- W. Ye, J. Heidemann, and D. Estrin, Medium access control with coordinated, adaptive sleeping for wireless sensor networks. IEEE/ACM Trans. on Networking 12(3) (2004) 493–506.Google Scholar