Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 3, May June 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
Performance Evaluation of proposed RBR algorithm with AODV algorithm for the determination of optimized energy techniques
Lalit Kumar Saraswat1, Dr. Sachin Kumar2
1 Research Scholar, Department of CSE, Bhagwant University, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India
reserved, instead of routing the data to a path that minimize consumed power.
2. RELATED WORK
Efficient utilization of energy is very important for the WSNs. The sensors are extremely energy bounded, hence the network formed by these sensors are also energy constrained. The communication devices on these sensors are small and have limited power and sensing ranges. A routing protocol coordinates the activities of individual nodes in the network in order to achieve global goals and in an efficient manner. Hence lifetime of network depends on appropriate routing protocol. There are four main types of routing protocols in wireless sensor network. They can be classified as datacentric, hierarchical, location-based [1] and multipath: In data-centric routing, the base station sends queries to certain areas and waits for data from the sensors located in the selected areas. The main data centric algorithms are SPIN [2] in which meta-data negotiation solves the problems of flooding, overlapping of sensing areas and resource blindness, Directed Diffusion [3][4] in which each node disseminate the date interest in receive. In Gradient-Based Routing, a packet is forwarded on a link with the largest gradient [5] and CADR is a protocol [6], which is a general form of Directed Diffusion. In Hierarchical algorithms clusters are formed in order to segregate the areas of monitoring environment as LEACH, PEGASIS. The main purpose of hierarchical routing is to efficiently maintain the energy consumption of sensor nodes by involving them in multi-hop communication within a specific cluster and by performing data aggregation and fusion in order to reduce the number of transmitted messages to the sink. Cluster formation is based on the energy reserve of sensors and sensors proximity to the cluster head [7] [8]. LocationBased algorithm GAF [9]) is based on the use of routing protocols for sensor networks require location information Page 395
1. INTRODUCTION
A Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) consists of lightweight, low power, small size of sensor nodes. Sensor nodes are constrained in energy and bandwidth. Routing of sensor data has been one of the challenging areas in wireless sensor networks. Present research on routing in wireless sensor networks mainly focused on protocols that are energy aware in order to maximize the lifetime of the network, scalable for large number of sensor nodes and tolerant to battery exhaustion. There are various possible routes between any two nodes over which the data can flow. Any node in WSN can easily transmit their data packet to a sink node, if it has enough battery power. If any node is far from its neighbor node then large amount of energy is required to transmit the data to sink node. After every transmission, remaining energy of this node decreases and after some transmission, this node will be eliminated from the network because of empty battery and overall lifetime of the network will decreases. Network lifetime is defined as the time until the first node in the network dies. In order to maximize the network lifetime, data should be routed such that energy consumption is fair among the nodes in proportion to their energy
3. ASSUMPTIONS
The proposed system model has the following assumptions. 1. Each node performs sensing task periodically and always has some data to send to the base station. 2. All nodes are stationary and energy constrained. 3. Geographic Location of each node is known. 4. There is no energy hole in the network. 5. Base station is externally powered and has high storage and computation capability 6. All the nodes use multi-hop routing method to forward the data to the closest relay node. 7. Relay nodes carry the sensory data to the base station. 8. There is only one transmission range fixed for all the nodes.
6. SIMULATION RESULTS
In this section, the performance of proposed algorithm is analyzed and compared with AODV routing protocol. 6.1 Remaining Node Energy
The remaining node energy of all sensors (10 nodes) at the end of simulation has been plotted in figure 1. The graph shows that proposed algorithm has distributed overall energy over the entire network in a more balanced way. From the results, the remaining battery capacity of nodes in AODV decreases very early. This is because the sensor nodes near the sink nodes consume a large amount of battery power to forward data packets from a sensor node which is located far from the sink node. Therefore, the sensor nodes far from the sink nodes cannot find the route to the sink node. If the route is not found, each 5. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION sensor node tries to find it again. As results, many sensor We have evaluated the performance of the proposed nodes consume a large amount of battery power to find algorithm using simulation and compared its performance the route to the base station nodes. with AODV protocol [12]. The AODV protocol is one of the reactive routing protocols that can construct the route when data transmission is required. In this protocol, a source node broadcasts the route request (RREQ) packet to the entire network, and all the nodes rebroadcast the received RREQ packet immediately. Therefore, we use the AODV protocol as the basic protocol Simulation experiments were used to analyze the performance of RBR algorithm using the Castalia Simulator [13], which is a widely used network simulator for WSNs based on OMNET++ [14].The various Simulation Parameters are as given
Parameter Simulation Area Total Sensor Nodes Simulation Time Remote Site Transmission Range Packet Size Average Packet Rate Node initial Energy Energy Threshold Level
Value 100 m * 100 m 10 to 50 100 sec Base Station 10 m 2KB 0.5 Packets/sec 100 Joule 0.5 Joule Table 1: Remaining Energy of different nodes for RBR algorithm and AODV protocol 6.2 Energy Consumption The graph for energy consumption vs. number of nodes of two routing algorithms is shown in Figure 2. The total energy consumption of two routing algorithms increases as number of nodes or increases. However, proposed algorithm performs better than AODV protocol. Energy consumption of the network is the sum of energy consumption of all the nodes in the network.. Page 397
Protocol RBR AODV Node 1 67 46 Node 2 56 74 Node 3 85 73 Node 4 48 35 Node 5 62 28 Node 6 67 51 Node 7 51 30 Node 8 44 58 Node 9 74 36 Node 10 60 39
7. CONCLUSIONS
The proposed RBR algorithm balance the energy consumption rates among the nodes in proportion to their energy reserved. The performance of proposed RBR Figure 2: Energy consumption comparison for RBR and algorithm is compared with AODV algorithm. The performance of these protocols is compared on the basis of AODV for different number of nodes packet delivery ratio, energy consumption and remaining node energy. Node 10 20 30 40 50 Count We have determined the performance of RBR algorithm for different number of nodes and concluded that a routing 0.025 0.031 0.041 0.049 0.056 RBR protocol with more routing overhead would consume more 0.032 0.036 0.048 0.057 0.067 AODV energy than the routing protocol with less routing overhead means AODV routing algorithm has higher energy consumption than proposed RBR algorithm because of Table 2: Energy Consumption for RBR and AODV for higher routing overhead. Finally we can say that packet delivery ratio in proposed routing algorithm is more than different number of nodes that using AODV routing, and energy consumption of nodes is also balanced in the proposed RBR algorithm. 6.3 Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR) Packet Delivery Ratio is the proportion to the total amount of packets reached the receiver and amount of packet sent by source. If the amount of malicious node increases, PDR decreases. PDR (%) = Number of packets successfully delivered to destination /Number of packets generated by source node Figure 3 gives the percentage packets delivered in each round using proposed algorithm and AODV approach for WSNs. The proposed algorithm gives higher percentage of packets delivered as compared to AODV algorithm. As shown in figure, proposed algorithm performs better as compared to the AODV because of limited congestion. The percentage of packets delivered in proposed algorithm routing is slightly more than that in AODV routing.
REFERENCES
[1] A.K. Akkaya, and M. Younis, "A Survey on Routing Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks", Elsevier Ad Hoc Network Journal, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp 325-349, 2005. [2] W. Heinzelman, J. Kulik, and H. Balakrishnan, Adaptive protocols for information dissemination in wireless sensor networks, in the Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom99), Seattle, WA, August 1999. [3] C. Intanagonwiwat, R. Govindan and D. Estrin, "Directed diffusion: A scalable and robust communication paradigm for sensor networks", in the Proceedings of the 6th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom'00), Boston, MA, August 2000. [4] D. Estrin, et al., Next century challenges: Scalable Coordination in Sensor Networks, in the Proceedings of the 5th annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom99), Seattle, WA, August 1999. [5] C. Schurgers and M.B. Srivastava, Energy efficient routing in wireless sensor networks, in the MILCOM Proceedings on Communications for Network-Centric Operations: Creating the Information Force, McLean, VA, 2001.of the First Workshop on Sensor Networks Page 398
Page 399