Advertisement

An Evaluation of Performance of Location-Based and Location-Free Routing Protocols in Underwater Sensor Networks

  • Nasarudin IsmailEmail author
  • Mohd Murtadha Mohamad
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1073)

Abstract

Nowadays, both academia and industries has been actively conducting research and development of Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks (UWSNs) to support various widely available application such as oil/gas monitoring system, tsunami monitoring, disaster prevention and environment monitoring. However, developing an efficient communication in UWSNs is a demanding task due to the irregular characteristic of underwater environment. Due to this reason, the research in network technology of UWSNs has been underway to overcome the lack of available network technology in UWSNs. For this research, we are going to evaluate the performance of the existing proposed UWSNs routing protocols under different network densities. The objective of this research is to compare the performance of location based and location free UWSNs routing protocols under several different dense network condition. We have selected several UWSNs routing protocol location-free like Underwater Flooding (UWFlooding) and Depth Based Routing (DBR) and for location based like Vector-Based Forwarding (VBF) Protocol and Hop-by-Hop Vector-Based Forwarding (HH-VBF). The results clearly shown that location-based is outperform the location-free routing protocols in most test. However due to the impractical use of finding location of nodes in water environment, location-free is still the best solution for UWSNs.

Keywords

UWSNs Routing protocol Flooding Location-based Location-free Aqua-Sim 

References

  1. 1.
    Akyildiz, I.F., Pompili, D., Melodia, T.: Underwater acoustic sensor networks: research challenges. Ad Hoc Netw. 3(3), 257–279 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ayaz, M., Baig, I., Abdullah, A., Faye, I.: A survey on routing techniques in underwater wireless sensor networks. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 34(6), 1908–1927 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2011.06.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Climent, S., Sanchez, A., Capella, J.V., Meratnia, N., Serrano, J.J.: Underwater acoustic wireless sensor networks: advances and future trends in physical, MAC and routing layers. Sensors (Basel) 14(1), 795–833 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Li, N., Martínez, J.-F., Meneses Chaus, J., Eckert, M.: A survey on underwater acoustic sensor network routing protocols. Sensors 16(3), 414 (2016). http://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/16/3/414
  5. 5.
    Ismail, N., Mohamad, M.M.: Review on energy efficient opportunistic routing protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks. KSII Trans. Internet Inf. Syst. 12(7), 3064–3094 (2018). http://itiis.org/digital-library/manuscript/2058
  6. 6.
    Zenia, N.Z., Aseeri, M., Ahmed, M.R., Chowdhury, Z.I., Shamim Kaiser, M.: Energy-efficiency and reliability in MAC and routing protocols for underwater wireless sensor network: a survey. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 71, 72–85 (2016). http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1084804516301230
  7. 7.
    Awan, K.M., Shah, P.A., Iqbal, K., Gillani, S., Ahmad, W., Nam, Y.: Underwater wireless sensor networks: a review of recent issues and challenges. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2019, 1–20 (2019). https://www.hindawi.com/journals/wcmc/2019/6470359/
  8. 8.
    Ovaliadis, K., Savage, N., Kanakaris, V.: Energy efficiency in underwater sensor networks: a research review. Sci. Technol. 3(1), 151–156 (2010). http://www.jestr.org/downloads/volume3/fulltext272010.pdf
  9. 9.
    Ahmed, M., Salleh, M., Channa, M.I., Rohani, M.F.L.: Energy efficient routing protocols for underwater wireless sensor networks: a review. TELKOMNIKA (Telecommun. Comput. Electron. Control) 15(1), 212 (2017). http://journal.uad.ac.id/index.php/TELKOMNIKA/article/view/4706
  10. 10.
    Darehshoorzadeh, A., Boukerche, A.: Underwater sensor networks: a new challenge for opportunistic routing protocols. IEEE Commun. Mag. 53(11), 98–107 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ghoreyshi, S., Shahrabi, A., Boutaleb, T.: A novel cooperative opportunistic routing scheme for underwater sensor networks. Sensors 16(3), 297 (2016). http://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/16/3/297
  12. 12.
    Coutinho, R.W.L., Boukerche, A., Vieira, L.F.M., Loureiro, A.A.F.: Design guidelines for opportunistic routing in underwater networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 54(2), 40–48 (2016). http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/lpdocs/epic03/wrapper.htm?arnumber=7402259
  13. 13.
    Kheirabadi, M.T., Mohamad, M.M.: Greedy routing in underwater acoustic sensor networks: a survey. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2013(9), 21 (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Xie, P., Cui, J.H., Lao, L.: VBF: vector-based forwarding protocol for underwater sensor networks. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics). LNCS, vol. 3976, pp. 1216–1221 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nicolaou, N., See, A., Xie, P., Cui, J.-H., Maggiorini, D.: Improving the robustness of location-based routing for underwater sensor networks. In: OCEANS 2007 – Europe, pp. 1–6. IEEE (2007). http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4302470/
  16. 16.
    Coutinho, R.W.L., Boukerche, A., Vieira, L.F.M., Loureiro, A.A.F.: GEDAR: geographic and opportunistic routing protocol with Depth Adjustment for mobile underwater sensor networks. In: 2014 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), pp. 251–256. IEEE (2014). http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/lpdocs/epic03/wrapper.htm?arnumber=6883327
  17. 17.
    Jornet, J.M., Stojanovic, M., Zorzi, M.: Focused beam routing protocol for underwater acoustic networks. In: Proceedings of Third ACM International Workshop on Wireless Network Testbeds, Experimental Evaluation & Characterization, WuWNeT 2008, p. 75 (2008). http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1410107.1410121
  18. 18.
    Yan, H., Shi, Z.J., Cui, J.H.: DBR: depth-based routing for underwater sensor networks. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics). LNCS, vol. 4982, pp. 72–86 (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wahid, A., Dongkyun, K.: Analyzing routing protocols for underwater wireless sensor networks. Int. J. Commun. Netw. Inf. Secur. 2(3), 253–261 (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yu, H., Yao, N., Wang, T., Li, G., Gao, Z., Tan, G.: WDFAD-DBR: weighting depth and forwarding area division DBR routing protocol for UASNs. Ad Hoc Netw. 37, 256–282 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xie, P.X.P., Zhou, Z.Z.Z., Peng, Z.P.Z., Yan, H.Y.H., Hu, T.H.T., Cui, J.-H.C.J.-H., et al.: Aqua-Sim: an NS-2 based simulator for underwater sensor networks. In: Ocean 2009, MTS/IEEE Biloxi - Marine Technology for Our Future: Global and Local Challenges, pp. 1–7 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pusat Teknologi MaklumatUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn MalaysiaParit Raja, Batu PahatMalaysia
  2. 2.School of Computing, Faculty of EngineeringUniversiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM)SkudaiMalaysia

Personalised recommendations