Mobile Networks and Applications

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 283–297 | Cite as

Randomized 3-D Routing in Fully- and Partially-Covered Sensor Networks



In recent years, sensor network technology has been proposed to improve the detection level of natural disasters (e.g. volcanoes, tornadoes, tsunamis). However, this technology has several design issues that need to be improved. We, therefore in this paper, focus on two main design issues: coverage and routing. For coverage issue, we introduce a new approach for obtaining a fully covered network in \(\boldsymbol{3}\textbf{-}{\boldsymbol D}\) environment such that every single point in a region is fully covered by at least one sensor node. This approach is referred to as the Chipset Coverage Model and Algorithm. This would be accomplished by using a small number of sensor nodes in order to save up some energy. Based on our coverage approach, we address the routing issue by proposing a new position-based routing protocol referred to as the \(\boldsymbol{3}\textbf{-}{\boldsymbol D}\) Randomized Sensing Spheres routing protocol (\(\boldsymbol{3}\textbf{-}{\boldsymbol D}\) \(\boldsymbol{RSS}\)). We show that the \(\boldsymbol{3}\textbf{-}{\boldsymbol D}\) \(\boldsymbol{RSS}\) protocol guarantees packet delivery. Moreover, from our simulation, we demonstrate that the \(\boldsymbol{3}\textbf{-}{\boldsymbol D}\) \(\boldsymbol{RSS}\) has a behaviour close to the behaviour of an existing \(\boldsymbol{3\textbf{-}D}\) progress-based protocol in terms of hop dilation and routing delay, where the delay is defined as Quality of Service (QoS) metric. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the \(\boldsymbol{3}\textbf{-}{\boldsymbol D}\) \(\boldsymbol{RSS}\) protocol outperforms the existing progress-based protocol in terms of Euclidean and power dilations. Thus, the new protocol reduces the energy consumption of the nodes and, therefore, prolongs the lifetime of the sensing nodes. For partially covered networks, we propose a dynamic position-based routing protocol referred to as the \(\boldsymbol{3}\textbf{-}{\boldsymbol D}\) Randomized Sensing Spheres version 1 routing protocol (\(\boldsymbol{3}\textbf{-}{\boldsymbol D}\) \(\boldsymbol{RSSv1}\)). This protocol increases the chances of delivering packets by moving linearly towards the destinations. We demonstrate that the \(\boldsymbol{3}\textbf{-}{\boldsymbol D}\) \(\boldsymbol{RSSv1}\) has a remarkable delivery rate compared to an existing progress-based routing protocol.


sensing-covered regions 3-D routing partially-covered networks 


  1. 1.
    Barriére L, Fraigniaud P, Narayanan L (2001) Robust position-based routing in wireless ad hoc networks with unstable transmission ranges. In: DIALM ’01: Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on discrete algorithms and methods for mobile computing and communications. ACM, New York, pp 19–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Finn G (1987) Routing and addressing problems in large metropolitan-scale internetworks. Technical report ISI Research Report ISU/RR-87-180, Inst. for scientific informationGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chandrasekhar V, Seah WK, Choo YS, Ee HV (2006) Localization in underwater sensor networks: survey and challenges. In: ACM WUWNet 2006, pp 33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Varshney PK (1996) Distributed detection and data fusion. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huang C-F, Tseng Y-C (2003) The coverage problem in a wireless sensor network. In: WSNA ’03: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM international conference on wireless sensor networks and applications. ACM, New York, pp 115–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Meguerdichian S, Koushanfar F, Potkonjak M, Srivastava MB (2001) Coverage problems in wireless ad-hoc sensor networks. INFOCOM 2001. Twentieth annual joint conference of the IEEE computer and communications societies. Proceedings, vol 3. IEEE, Piscataway, pp 1380–1387Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wang X, Xing G, Zhang Y, Lu C, Pless R, Gill C (2003) Integrated coverage and connectivity configuration in wireless sensor networks. In: SenSys ’03: proceedings of the 1st international conference on embedded networked sensor systems. ACM, New York, pp 28–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alam SMN, Haas ZJ (2006) Coverage and connectivity in three-dimensional networks. In: MobiCom ’06: proceedings of the 12th annual international conference on mobile computing and networking. ACM, New York, pp 346–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dhillon S, Chakrabarty K (2003) Sensor placement for effective coverage and surveillance in distributed sensor networks. Wirel Commun Netw (WCNC) IEEE 3:1609–1614Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jacquet P, Muhlethaler P, Qayyum A, Laouiti A, Viennot L, Clausen T (2001) Optimized link state routing protocol. Internet draft, draftietf-manet-olsr-04.txt, work in progressGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giordano S, Stojmenovic I (2003) Position based routing algorithms for ad hoc networks: a taxonomy. In: Cheng X, Huang X, Du DZ (eds) Ad hoc wireless networking. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jain R, Puri A, Sengupta R (2001) Geographical routing using partial information for wireless ad hoc networks. IEEE Pers Commun 8(1):48–57 (see also IEEE Wirel Commun)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bose P, Morin P, Stojmenović I, Urrutia J (2001) Routing with guaranteed delivery in ad hoc wireless networks, vol 7, no 6. Kluwer, Hingham, pp 609–616Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Xing G, Lu C, Pless R, Huang Q (2006) Impact of sensing coverage on greedy geographic routing algorithms. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 17(4):348–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fortune S (1992) Voronoi diagrams and Delaunay triangulations. In: Du DZ, Hwang F (eds) Computing in Euclidean geometry. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 193–233Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chew LP (1989) There are planar graphs almost as good as the complete graph, vol 39, no 2. Academic, Orlando, pp 205–219Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eppstein D (2000) Spanning trees and spanners In: Sack JR, Urrutia J (eds) Handbook of computational geometry. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 425–461Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li X-Y, Wan P-J, Wang Y (2001) Power efficient and sparse spanner for wireless ad hoc networks. In: Proc. of the 10th IEEE international conference on computer communications and networks (ICCCN). Scottsdale, ArizonaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bose P, Morin P (1999) Online routing in triangulations. In: ISAAC ’99: proceedings of the 10th international symposium on algorithms and computation. Springer, London, pp 113–122Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kao G, Fevens T, Opatrny J (2005) Position-based routing on 3-D geometric graphs in mobile ad hoc networks. Proceedings of the 17th Canadian conference on computational geometry (CCCG05), pp 88–91Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stojmenovic I, Lin X (2001) Loop-free hybrid single-path/flooding routing algorithms with guaranteed delivery for wireless networks. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 12(10):1023–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Takagi H, Kleinrock L (1984) Optimal transmission ranges for randomly distributed packet radio terminals. IEEE Trans Commun 32(3):246–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kranakis E, Singh H, Urrutia J (1999) Compass routing on geometric networks. In: Proc. 11th Canadian conference on computational geometry. Vancouver, August, pp 51–54Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Abdallah A, Fevens T, Opatrny J (2006) Hybrid position-based 3d routing algorithms with partial flooding. May, pp 227–230Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Haque I, Assi C (2006) Olear: optimal localized energy aware routing in mobile ad hoc networks, vol 8. June, pp 3548–3553Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Huang C-F, Tseng Y-C, Lo L-C (2004) The coverage problem in three-dimensional wireless sensor networks. Global telecommunications conference (GLOBECOM), vol 5. IEEE, Piscataway, pp 3182–3186Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ramanathan R, Hain R (2000) Topology control of multihop wireless networks using transmit power adjustment. In: Proc. IEEE Infocom, Tel-Aviv, Israel, pp 404–413Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computing and Information ScienceUniversity of GuelphGuelphCanada

Personalised recommendations