Wireless Networks

, Volume 11, Issue 6, pp 787–794 | Cite as

Analysis of Energy Conservation in Sensor Networks



In this paper we use the Erlang theory to quantitatively analyse the trade offs between energy conservation and quality of service in an ad-hoc wireless sensor network. Nodes can be either sleeping, where no transmission or reception can occur, or awake where traffic is processed. Increasing the proportion of time spent in the sleeping state will decrease throughput and increase packet loss and delivery delay. However there is a complex relationship between sleeping time and energy consumption. Increasing the sleeping time does not always lead to an increase in the energy saved. We identify the energy consumption profile for various levels of sensor network activity and derive an optimum energy saving curve that provides a basis for the design of extended-life ad hoc wireless sensor networks.


sensor networks ad hoc networks energy efficient design QoS Erlang formula 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. I.F. Akyildiz, W. Su, Y. Sankarasubramaniam, and E. Cayirci, Wireless sensor networks: A survey, computer networks, 38 (2002) 393–422.Google Scholar
  2. D. Bear, Principles of telecommunication Traffic engineering, Peter Peregrinus Ltd. (1988).Google Scholar
  3. L. Clare, G. Pottie, and J. Agre, Self-organizing distributed sensor networks, SPIE—the international society for optical engineering, Orlando, FL, (April 1999) pp. 229–237.Google Scholar
  4. D. Estrin and R. Govindan, Next century challenges: Scalable coordination in sensor networks, MobiCom 1999, Seattle, USA, (1999) pp. 263–270.Google Scholar
  5. J.E. Flood, Telecommunications, Switching, Traffic and Networks, Longman (1994).Google Scholar
  6. Q. Gao, D.J. Holding, Y. Peng, and K.J. Blow, Energy efficiency design challenge in sensor networks, in: Proc. of LCS 2002, London, UK, (2002) pp. 69–72.Google Scholar
  7. C.E. Jones, K.M. Sivalingam, P. Agrawal, and J.C. Chen, A survey of energy efficient network protocols for wireless networks, Wireless Networks, 7 (2001) 343–358.Google Scholar
  8. P. Lettieri and M. srivastava, Advances in wireless terminals, IEEE Personal communications 6 (1999) 6–18.Google Scholar
  9. R.E. Mirollo and S.H. Strogatz, Synchronization of pulse coupled biological oscillators, SIAM J. Applied Mathematics, (1990).Google Scholar
  10. J.M. Rabaey, M.J. Ammer, J.L. da Silva Jr., D. Patel, and S. Roundy, PicoRadio supports ad hoc ultra low-power wireless networking, IEEE Computer 33 (2000) 42–48.Google Scholar
  11. C.S. Raghavendra and S. Singh, PAMAS–power aware multi-access protocol with signaling for adhoc networks, computer communications review, (July 1998).Google Scholar
  12. S. Raghumanshi and A. Mishra, An approach towards improved energy-efficiency in wireless sensor nets, in: Proc. of IEEE RAWCON 2003, Boston USA, (2003) pp. 225–228.Google Scholar
  13. A. Savvides, C.C. Han, and M. Srivastava, Dynamic fine-grained localization in ad-hoc networks of sensors, MobiCom 2001, Rome, Italy, (2001) pp. 166–179.Google Scholar
  14. C. Schurgers, V. Tsiatsis, S. Ganeriwal, and M.B. Srivastava, Optimizing sensor networks in the energy-latency-density design space, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 1(1) (2002) 70–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. C. Schurgers, V. Tsiatsis, and M.B. Srivastava, STEM: Topology management for energy efficient sensor networks, IEEE Aerospace Conference, 2001.Google Scholar
  16. R. Simon and E. Farrugia, Topology-transparent support for sensor networks, in: Proc. of 1st European Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks (LCNS 2920), Berlin, Germany, (2004) pp. 122–137.Google Scholar
  17. K. Sohrabi, J. Gao, V. Ailawadhi, and G. Pottie, Protocols for self-organization of a wireless sensor network, IEEE Personal Communications Magazine 7 (2000) 16–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. M. Stemm and R.H. Katz, Measuring and reducing energy consumption of network interfaces in hand-held devices, IEICE Transactions on Communications E80-B (1997) 1125–1131.Google Scholar
  19. M.H. Thierer, Delay systems wich limited accessibility, preprints of technical papers, 5th International Teletraffic Congress, New York, (1967) pp. 203–213.Google Scholar
  20. P. Venkitasubramaniam, S. Adireddy, and L. Tong, Opportunistic ALOHA and cross-layer design for sensor networks, in: Proc. of IEEE Military Comm. Conf., Boston, USA, (2003) pp. 123–128.Google Scholar
  21. I. Wokoma, I. Liabotis, O. Prnjat, L. Sacks, and I. Marshall, A weakly coupled adaptive gossip protocol for application level active networks, IEEE 3rd International workshop on policies for distributed systems and networks—policy 2002, Monterey, CA, USA, (2002).Google Scholar
  22. Y. Xu, J. Heidemann, and D. Estrin, Adaptive energy-conserving routing for multihop ad-hoc networks, USC/ISI Research Report 527, 2000.Google Scholar
  23. W. Ye, J. Heidemann, and Deborah Estrin, An energy-efficient MAC protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks, in: Proceedings of the 21st International Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM 2002), New York, NY, USA, (2002).Google Scholar
  24. W. Ye, J. Heidemann, and D. Estrin, Medium access control with coordinated, adaptive sleeping for wireless sensor networks, Technical Report ISI-TR-567, USC/Information Sciences Institute, (2003).Google Scholar
  25. R. Zheng, J. Hou, and L. Sha, Asynchronous wakeup for ad hoc networks, in: Proc. of MobiHoc 2003, Annapolis, Maryland, USA, (2003) pp. 35–35.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Q. Gao
    • 1
  • K. J. Blow
    • 1
  • D. J. Holding
    • 1
  • Ian Marshall
    • 2
  1. 1.University of KentCanterburyUK
  2. 2.Aston UniversityBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations