Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

ARO-RTP: Performance analysis of an energy efficient opportunistic routing for underwater IoT networks

  • Published:
Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 20 October 2023

This article has been updated

Abstract

The term "Underwater Internet of Things" (UIoT) refers to a system of intelligent, networked devices that may function in a variety of water conditions. During communication, the transmission quality is diminished by high levels of interference and collisions, which in turn causes a slow End-to-End (E2E), low latency, and a low Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR). And when the basis node does not choose an immediate forwarder node, an issue known as the "void hole" occurs and thus leads to the wastage of more power. Despite playing a crucial role in enabling underwater communication, IoUT frameworks still face difficulties because of their unstable radio signals, low resources, unreliable transmission medium, low bandwidth, limited range, low transmission rate, inborn noise, node mobility, slow propagation speed, and limited battery capacity. Therefore, it is greatly desirable to have secure communication with a prolonged network lifetime. In this research work, an opportunistic routing-based reliable transmission protocol (OR-RTP) is proposed to send the packs toward the superficial sink to lessen the high energy consumption (EC). The source node recognizes the furtherance relay set in the proposed protocol based on the forwarder's local information. The proposed protocol uses a meta-heuristic-based relay selection scheme (Artificial rabbits’ optimization-ARO) to pick the best relay by balancing the forwarder's EC and packet delivery ratio (PDR). During packet transmission, most of the energy is ruined because of collisions among Under Water Acoustic Sensor Networks (UW-ASNs') sensor nodes. This work developed an RTP for every forwarder node that sends data to the surface basin to reduce the problem of collision. The OR-RTP protocol has been extensively simulated, and the results are compared to those of other routing protocols in terms of EC, PDR, throughput, and network lifetime. The proposed model achieved 85% of PDR on 400 nodes and 92% of PDR for 700 nodes, whereas the existing model Grey Wolf Optimization achieved 51% of PDR on 400 nodes and 73% of PDR for 700 nodes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Change history

References

  1. Sher A, Khan A, Javaid N, Khan WZ (2018) Void hole avoidance for reliable data delivery in IoT enabled underwater wireless sensor networks. Sensors 18(10):3271–3282

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Coutinho RW, Boukerche A, Vieira LF, Loureiro AA (2015) A novel void node recovery paradigm for long-term underwater sensor networks. Ad Hoc Netw 34:144–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yisa AG, Dargahi T, Belguith S, Hammoudeh M (2021) Security challenges of internet of underwater things: a systematic literature review. Trans Emerg Telecommun Technol 32(3):4203–4212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Manoharan JS (2022) Double attribute-based node deployment in wireless sensor networks using novel weight-based clustering approach. Sādhanā 47(3):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rodoshi RT, Song Y, Choi W (2021) Reinforcement learning-based routing protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks. A comparative survey. IEEE Access 9:154578–154599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Javaid N (2022) NADEEM: Neighbor node approaching distinct energy-efficient mates for reliable data delivery in underwater WSNs. Trans Emerg Telecommun Technol 33(8):3805–3814

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ainslie MA, Halvorsen MB, Robinson SP (2021) A terminology standard for underwater acoustics and the benefits of international standardization. IEEE J Oceanic Eng 47(1):179–200

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gavazzi GM, Kapasakali DA, Kerchof F, Deleu S, Degraer S, Lancker VV (2021) Subtidal natural hard substrate quantitative habitat mapping: interlinking underwater acoustics and optical imagery with machine learning. Remote Sens 13(22):4608–4621

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fattah S, Gani A, Ahmedy I, Idris MYI, Hashem IAT (2020) A survey on underwater wireless sensor networks: Requirements, taxonomy, recent advances, and open research challenges. Sensors 20(18):5393–5402

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Islam N, Dey S, Sampalli S (2018) Energy-balancing unequal clustering approach to reduce the blind spot problem in wireless sensor networks (WSNs). Sensors 18(12):4258–4265

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Jan N, Javaid N, Javaid Q, Alrajeh N, Alam M, Khan ZA, Niaz IA (2017) A balanced energy-consuming and hole-alleviating algorithm for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Access 5:6134–6150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Akbar M, Javaid N, Khan AH, Imran M, Shoaib M, Vasilakos A (2016) Efficient data gathering in 3D linear underwater wireless sensor networks using sink mobility. Sensors 16(3):404–419

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. Li S, Qu W, Liu C, Qiu T, Zhao Z (2019) Survey on high reliability wireless communication for underwater sensor networks. J Netw Comput Appl 148:1–9

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. Manoharan JS (2021) Audio tagging using cnn based audio neural networks for massive data processing. J Artif Intell Capsul Netw 3(4):365–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Qiu T, Zhao Z, Zhang T, Chen C, Chen CP (2019) Underwater internet of things in smart ocean: system architecture and open issues. IEEE Trans Industr Inf 16(7):4297–4307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Khan ZA, Karim OA, Abbas S, Javaid N, Zikria YB, Tariq U (2021) Q-learning based energy-efficient and void avoidance routing protocol for underwater acoustic sensor networks. Comput Netw 197:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ahmad I, Rahman T, Zeb A, Khan I, Othman MTB, Hamam H (2022) Cooperative energy-efficient routing protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks. Sensors 22(18):6945–6957

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kumar R, Shekhar S, Garg H, Kumar M, Sharma B, Kumar S (2022) EESR: Energy efficient sector-based routing protocol for reliable data communication in UWSNs. Comput Commun 192:268–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Subramani N, Mohan P, Alotaibi Y, Alghamdi S, Khalaf OI (2022) An efficient metaheuristic-based clustering with routing protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks. Sensors 22(2):415–423

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gul H, Ullah G, Khan M, Khan Y (2021) EERBCR: Energy-efficient regional based cooperative routing protocol for underwater sensor networks with sink mobility. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 1–13

  21. Kapileswar N, Kumar PP (2022) Energy efficient routing in IOT based UWSN using bald eagle search algorithm. Trans Emerg Telecommun Technol 33(1):4399–4407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sathiamoorthy J, Usha M, Ravichandran S, Nishanth RB (2022) OEEFCP–an optimal energy efficient framework employing cluster communication based routing protocol for UWCNs. Wireless Netw 28(4):1389–1409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Gola KK, Gupta B (2021) Underwater acoustic sensor networks: An energy efficient and void avoidance routing based on grey wolf optimization algorithm. Arab J Sci Eng 46(4):3939–3954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Adil M, Khan R, Ali J, Roh B-H, Ta QTH, Almaiah MA (2020) An energy proficient load balancing routing scheme for wireless sensor networks to maximize their lifespan in an operational environment. IEEE Access 8:163209–163224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Narayan V, Daniel AK, Chaturvedi P (2023) E-FEERP: enhanced fuzzy based energy efficient routing protocol for wireless sensor network. Wirel Pers Commun 131:1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Umar A, Javaid N, Ahmad A, Khan ZA, Qasim U, Alrajeh N, Hayat A (2015) DEADS: depth and energy aware dominating set based algorithm for cooperative routing along with sink mobility in underwater WSNs. Sensors 15(6):14458–14486

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. Javaid N, Ilyas N, Ahmad A, Alrajeh N, Qasim U, Khan ZA, Liaqat T, Khan MI (2015) An efficient data-gathering routing protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks. Sensors 15(11):29149–29181

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. Chauhan S, Chauhan N, Arya K (2013) Balancing energy consumption to maximize network lifetime in data-gathering sensor networks. Int J Eng Res 2(3):229–233

    Google Scholar 

  29. Karim OA, Javaid N, Sher A, Wadud Z, Ahmed S (2018) QL-EEBDG: QLearning based energy balanced routing in underwater sensor networks. EAI Endorsed Trans Energy Web 5(17):e15–e15

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ghoreyshi SM, Shahrabi A, Boutaleb T (2017) Void-handling techniques for routing protocols in underwater sensor networks: survey and challenges. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 19(2):800–827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Yang G, Dai L, Wei Z (2018) Challenges, threats, security issues and new trends of underwater wireless sensor networks. Sensors 18(11):3907

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  32. Stojanovic M (2007) ‘On the relationship between capacity and distance in an underwater acoustic communication channel.’ ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Comput Commun Rev 11(4):34–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Brekhovskikh LM, Lysanov YP, Lysanov JP (2003) Fundamentals of ocean acoustics. Springer Science & Business Media

    Google Scholar 

  34. Etter PC (2018) Underwater acoustic modelling and simulation. CRC Press

    Book  Google Scholar 

  35. Yu H, Yao N, Liu J (2015) An adaptive routing protocol in underwater sparse acoustic sensor networks. Ad Hoc Netw 34:121–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. LinkQuest. LinkQuest underwater acoustic modem UWM1000 specifications. http://www.linkquest.com/html/uwm1000.htm. Accessed 16 Jun 2017

Download references

Funding

No funding is provided for the preparation of manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Ramapuram Campus, Chennai, India

    Judy Simon, M Aarthi Elaveini, N. Kapileswar & P. Phani Kumar

Authors
  1. Judy Simon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M Aarthi Elaveini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Kapileswar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. Phani Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors have made equal contributions to the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. Kapileswar.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies of human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Conflict of interest

Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Consent to publish

All the authors involved in this manuscript give full consent for publication of this submitted article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised: The incorrect corresponding was captured.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Simon, J., Elaveini, M., Kapileswar, N. et al. ARO-RTP: Performance analysis of an energy efficient opportunistic routing for underwater IoT networks. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 17, 1–17 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-023-01557-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-023-01557-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation