Route in Mobile WSN and Get Self-deployment for Free
We consider a system consisting of a set of mobile sensors. They are disseminated in a region of interest and their mobility is controlled (as opposed to mobility imposed by the entity on which they are embedded). A routing protocol in this context enables any point of the region to be reached starting from any node, regardless of the initial sensor deployment. This operation involves message forwarding and/or sensor motion. In this paper we present Grasp, a GReedy stAteless Routing Protocol for mobile wireless sensor networks (WSN). Grasp is simple and independent from the underlying communication model, but still provides results close to the optimal, with respect to the self-deployment of sensors over a given region. It ensures that (i) routing is always possible in a mobile WSN irrespective of the number of sensors, and (ii) above a given number of sensors in a considered zone the protocol eventually enables the routing to no longer require sensors to move, which yields to self-deployment. With Grasp, sensors autonomously reach a stable full coverage following geometrical patterns. This requires only 1.5 times the optimal number of sensors to cover a region. A theoretical analysis of convergence proves these properties. Simulation results matching the analysis are also presented.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Bai, X., et al.: Deploying wireless sensors to achieve both coverage and connectivity. In: Mobihoc 2006, pp. 131–142 (2006)Google Scholar
- 2.Tan, G., Jarvis, S.A., Kermarrec, A.M.: Connectivity-guaranteed and obstacle-adaptive deployment schemes for mobile sensor networks. In: ICDCS 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
- 3.Butler, Z., Rus, D.: Controlling mobile sensors for monitoring events with coverage constraints. In: ICRA 2004, 26-May 1, 2004, vol. 2, pp. 1568–1573 (2004)Google Scholar
- 4.Jain, S., Fall, K., Patra, R.: Routing in a delay tolerant network. In: SIGCOMM 2004, pp. 145–158 (2004)Google Scholar
- 6.Hull, B., et al.: Cartel: a distributed mobile sensor computing system. In: SenSys 2006, pp. 125–138 (2006)Google Scholar
- 7.Zhao, W., Ammar, M.H., Zegura, E.W.: A message ferrying approach for data delivery in sparse mobile ad hoc networks. In: Mobihoc 2004, pp. 187–198 (2004)Google Scholar
- 8.Zhao, W., Ammar, M., Zegura, E.: Controlling the mobility of multiple data transport ferries in a delay-tolerant network. In: INFOCOM 2005, vol. 2, pp. 1407–1418 (2005)Google Scholar
- 10.Huguenin, K., Kermarrec, A.M., Fleury, E.: Route in Mobile WSN and Get Self-Deployment for Free. Research Report 6819, INRIA (January 2009), http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00357240/en/
- 11.Kwon et al.: Resilient localization for sensor networks in outdoor environments. In: ICDCS 2005, pp., 643–652 (2005)Google Scholar
- 12.Fang, Q., Gao, J., Guibas, L.: Locating and bypassing routing holes in sensor networks. In: INFOCOM 2004, vol. 4, pp. 2458–2468 (2004)Google Scholar
- 13.Karp, B., Kung, H.T.: GPSR: greedy perimeter stateless routing for wireless networks. In: MobiCom 2000, pp. 243–254 (2000)Google Scholar
- 14.Iyengar, R., Kar, K., Banerjee, S.: Low-coordination topologies for redundancy in sensor networks. In: Mobihoc 2005, pp. 332–342 (2005)Google Scholar
- 15.Lubachevsky, et al.: Spontaneous patterns in disk packings. In: Bridges 1998: Conf. on Mathematical Connections in Art, Music, and Science (1998)Google Scholar