Wireless Personal Communications

, Volume 96, Issue 2, pp 2741–2759 | Cite as

Dynamic Node Deployment and Cross Layer Opportunistic Robust Routing for PoI Coverage Using WSNs

  • Mandar Subhash Karyakarte
  • Anil Srinivas Tavildar
  • Rajesh Khanna
Article
  • 29 Downloads

Abstract

Point of interest (PoI) coverage is a potential application of mobile wireless sensor networks. The paper presents planar localised Delaunay triangulation (PLDT) based algorithm for self-deployment of sensor nodes for PoI coverage and optimise the data forwarding from PoI to sink. The deployment algorithm used to cover a PoI maintains connectivity all along the deployment. PLDT provides connectivity as well as path robustness compared to relative neighbourhood graphs (RNG) based straight line deployment strategy. But PLDT based path from PoI to sink has more number of hops as against RNG based path. To minimize the number of hops a cross-layer opportunistic robust routing protocol (CORRP) is designed and been used. CORRP uses request-to-send–clear-to-send (RTS–CTS) handshaking mechanism to select a forwarder amongst the contending nodes with minimal overheads. Performance of scheme is evaluated for PoI coverage with respect to time and distance.It is observed that the scheme adequately covers the PoI in finite time. The upper and lower bound on number of hops under zero loss and network failure conditions are estimated. Compared to RNG-based straight line deployment, simulation results show that PLDT deployment with CORRP exhibits better performance in the range of 40–10% for energy consumption and 12% for packet reception approximately for increasing value of node sleeping probability. Also the energy consumption under lossy links is less by 40% compared to RNG-based straight line deployment. Thus PLDT based deployment and forwarding with CORRP exhibits improvement for energy consumption, packet reception and ensures robustness.

Keywords

Point of interest Mobile wireless sensor networks Robust opportunistic routing 

References

  1. 1.
    Akyildiz, I., Su, W., Sankarasubramaniam, Y., & Cayirci, E. (2002). Wireless sensor networks: A survey. Computer Networks, 38(2), 393–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Batalin, M. A., & Sukhatme, G. S. (2002). Spreading out: A local approach to multi-robot coverage In Proceedings of sixth international symposium on distributed autonomous robotic systems (pp. 373–382).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bose, P., Devroye, L., Evans, W., & Kirkpatrick, D. (2002). On the spanning ratio of gabriel graphs and beta-skeletons. In Proceedings of Latin American theoretical informatics conference.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Busse, M., Haenselmann, T., & Effelsberg, W. (2006). Energy-efficient forwarding schemes for wireless sensor networks. In: Mobile and multimedia networks (WoWMoM): Proceedings of international symposium on a world of wireless (pp. 125–133).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chakrabarty, K., Iyengar, S. S., Qi, H., & Cho, E. (2002). Grid coverage for surveillance and target address in distributed sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 51(12), 1448–1453.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cheng, W., Li, M., Liu, K., Liu, Y., Li, X., & Liao, X. (2008). Sweep coverage with mobile sensors. In Proceedings of IEEE international parallel and distributed processing symposium (IPDPS) (pp. 1–9).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chew, P. L. (1986). There is a planar graph as good as the complete graph. In Proceedings of second symposium on computational geometry (pp. 169–177).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chew, L. P. (1989). Constrained delaunay triangulations. Algorithmica, 4, 97–108.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dhilon, S. S., Chakrabarty, K., & Iyengar, S. S. (2002). Sensor placement for grid coverage under imprecise detections. In Proceedings of 5th international conference information fusion (FUSION02) (pp. 1–10), Annapolis, MD, July 2002.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dobkin, D. P., Friedman, S. J., & Supowit, K. J. (1990). Delaunay graphs are almost as good as complete graphs. Discrete and Computational Geometry, 5(1), 399–407.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Erdelj, M., Razafindralambo, T., & Simplot-Ryl, D. (2013). Covering points of interest with mobile sensors. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 24(1), 32–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gage, D. W. (1992). Command control for many-robot systems. In Proceedings of 19th annual AUVS technical symposium. Reprinted in unmanned systems magazine (Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 28–34).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ghosh, A., & Das, S. K. (2006). Coverage and connectivity issues in wireless sensor networks. In R. Shorey, A. L. Ananda, M. C. Chan, & W. T. Ooi (Eds.), Mobile, Wireless and Sensor Networks: Technology, Applications and Future Directions (chap. 9, pp. 221–255). Wiley. doi:10.1002/0471755591.
  14. 14.
    Heinzelman, W. R., Chandrakasan, A., & Balakrishnan, H. (2000). Energy-efficient communication protocol for wireless microsensor networks. In Proceedings of 33rd Hawaii international conference system sciences (pp. 4–7).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heissenbuttel, M., Braun, T., Bernoulli, T., & Walchli, M. (2004). BLR: Beacon-less routing algorithm for mobile ad hoc networks. Journal on Computer Communications, 27(11), 1076–1086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heo, N., & Varshney, P. K. (2003). A distributed self-spreading algorithm for mobile wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC03) (pp. 1597–1602). New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Howard, A., & Mataric, M. J. (2002). Cover me! A self-deployment algorithm for mobile sensor networks. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference robotics and automation (ICRA02) (pp. 80–91). Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Howard, A., Mataric, M. J., & Sukhatme, G. S. (2002). An incremental self-deployment algorithm for mobile sensor networks. Autonomous Robots, 13(2), 113–126.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Karyakarte, M. S., Tavildar, A. S., & Khanna, R. (2015). Connectivity based cross-layer opportunistic forwarding for MWSNs. IETE Journal of Research. doi:10.1080/03772063.2015.1021388.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Keil, J. M., & Gutwin, C. A. (1989). The delaunay triangulation closely approximates the complete euclidean graph. In Proceedings of first workshop algorithms data structure.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Keil, J. M., & Gutwin, C. A. (1992). Classes of graphs which approximate the complete euclidean graph. Discrete and Computational Geometry, 7, 13–28.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Khatib, O. (1986). Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 5(1), 90–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Li, X., Calinescu, G., Wan, P., & Wang, Y. (2003). Localized delaunay triangulation with application in ad hoc wireless networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 14(10), 1035–1047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Li, X., Nayak, A., Simplot-Ryl, D., & Stojmenovic, I. (2010). Sensor placement in sensor and actuator networks. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Li, M., Cheng, W., Liu, K., He, Y., Li, X., & Liao, X. (2011). Sweep coverage with mobile sensors. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 10(11), 1534–1545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liu, C., & Wu, J. (2012). On multicopy opportunistic forwarding protocols in nondeterministic delay tolerant networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 23(6), 1121–1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mainwaring, A., Polastre, J., Szewczyk, R., Culler, D., & Anderson, J. (2002). Wireless sensor networks for habitat monitoring. In Proceedings of 1st ACM international workshop on wireless sensor networks and applications (WSNA02) (pp. 88–97). Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Meguerdichian, S., Koushanfar, F., Qu, G., & Potkonjak, M. (2001). Exposure in wire less ad-hoc sensor networks. In Proceedings of 7th annual international conference mobile computing and networking (pp. 139–150). Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Meguerdifor, S. (2001). Improving network coverage in wireless sensor networks, chian, F. Koushanfar, M. Potkonjak, M. Srivastava, Coverage problems in wireless ad-hoc sensor networks. In Proceedings of IEEE InfoCom (InfoCom01) (pp. 115–121). Anchorage, AK.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Poduri, S., & Sukhatme, G. S. (2004). Constrained coverage in mobile sensor networks. In Proceedings IEEE International Conference Robotics and Automation (ICRA04) (pp. 40–50). New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Satyanarayana, D., & Rao, S. V. (2008). Constrained delaunay triangulation for ad hoc networks. Journal of Computer Systems, Networks, and Communications, 2008, Article ID 160453. doi:10.1155/2008/160453.
  32. 32.
    Stemm, M., & Katz, R. H. (1997). Measuring and reducing energy consumption of network interfaces in hand-held devices. IEICE Transactions on Communications, E80-B(8), 1125–1131.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Veltri, G., Huang, Q., Qu, G., & Potkonjak, M. (2003). Minimal and maximal exposure path algorithms for wireless embedded sensor networks. In: Proceedings of 1st international conference embedded networked sensor systems (SenSys03) (pp. 40–50). Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wang, G., Cao, G., & LaPorta, T. (2003). A bidding protocol for deploying mobile sensors. In Proceedings of 11th IEEE international conference network protocols (ICNP03) (pp. 80–91). Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wang, G., Cao, G., & LaPorta, T. (2004). Movement-assisted sensor deployment. In Proceedings of IEEE InfoCom (InfoCom04) (pp. 80–91). Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang, B., Lim, H. B., & Ma, D. (2009). A survey of movement strategies for improving network coverage in wireless sensor networks. Computer Communications, 32(13/14), 1427–1436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wieselthier, J. E., Nguyen, G. D., & Ephremides, A. (2001). Algorithms for energy-efficient multicasting in ad hoc wireless networks. Mobile Networks and Applications, 6(3), 251–263.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Xi, M., Qi, Y., Wu, K., Zhao, J., & Li, M. (2011). Using potential to guide mobile nodes in wireless sensor networks. Ad Hoc and Sensor Wireless Networks, 12(3/4), 229–251.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Xing, G., & Mii, V. B. (2010). Wireless ad hoc and sensor networks. International Journal of Parallel, Emergent and Distributed Systems, 25(6), 437–438.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Xufei, M., Shaojie, T., Xiahua, X., Xiang-Yang, L., & Huadong, M. (2011). Energy-efficient opportunistic routing in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 22(11), 1934–1942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Younis, M., & Akkaya, K. (2008). Strategies and techniques for node placement in wireless sensor networks: A survey. Ad Hoc Networks, 6(4), 621–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zou, Y. & Chakrabarty, K. (2003). Sensor deployment and target localization based on virtual forces. In Proceedings of IEEE InfoCom (InfoCom03) (pp. 1293–1303). San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zou, Y., & Chakrabarty, K. (2003) Uncertainty-aware sensor deployment algorithms for surveillance applications. In Proceedings of IEEE global communications conference (GLOBECOM03).Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zou, Y., & Chakrabarty, K. (2004). Sensor deployment and target localization in distributed sensor networks. ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems, 3(1), 61–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mandar Subhash Karyakarte
    • 1
  • Anil Srinivas Tavildar
    • 1
  • Rajesh Khanna
    • 2
  1. 1.Vishwakarma Institute of Information TechnologyPuneIndia
  2. 2.Thapar UniversityPatialaIndia

Personalised recommendations