Sankalpa PHD Thesis Final 2010-10-28

AN ENERGY EFFICIENT DISTRIBUTED CLUSTER BASED SELF ORGANISING ALGORITHM FOR AD-HOC DEPLOYED WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS
By
Prasanna Sankalpa Gamwarige
A THESIS
This thesis is submitted to the Department of Electronic and Telecommunication Engineering at the University of Moratuwa in partial fullment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. October 2010
DECLARATION BY CANDIDATE
I certify that this thesis does not incorporate without acknowledgement any material previously submitted for a Degree or Diploma in any University; and to the best of my knowledge and belief it does not contain any material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text.
Certied by:
Dr. Chulantha Kulasekere Thesis Supervisor
October 1, 2010.
UNIVERSITY OF MORATUWA
A thesis submitted to the Department of Electronic and Telecommunication Engineering at the University of Moratuwa in partial fulllment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
AN ENERGY EFFICIENT DISTRIBUTED CLUSTER BASED SELF ORGANISING ALGORITHM FOR AD-HOC DEPLOYED WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS
Approved:
Prof. Saman Halgamuge University of Melbourne
Prof. Keerthi Walgama University of Peradeniya
Prof. Dileeka Dias University of Moratuwa
Dr. Ajith Pasqual University of Moratuwa
Dr. Chulantha Kulasekere University of Moratuwa October 1, 2010.
Abstract
Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) consist of a large number of inexpensive, low-power, sensors that can be placed in an ad hoc fashion to form a data gathering network. Subsequent to the sensor node deployment, the nodes will self-organize themselves to periodically collect reliable information from the environment to a central location called base station (BS). Once the nodes are deployed, upgrading and maintaining them is not practical. In such a scenario, the main concern would be the optimal utilization of the sensor energy, so that the entire sensor bed lasts as long as possible gathering useful information. Inter node communication for network organization and information gathering requires the most energy. Therefore, it is necessary to manage these activities in an energy ecient manner to optimize the lifetime of the sensor network. This research focuses on nding energy ecient methods of operating the sensor bed such that the lifetime is maximally extended. Distributed clustering provides an eective way for self-organizing the wireless sensor networks for periodic data gathering applications. The research identies the most positive and negative aspects of the currently available distributed clustering algorithms. Based on these ndings, the research proposes a new energy ecient distributed clustering algorithm where the cluster heads (CHs) are selected based on relative residual energy level of sensors. Further, the cluster boundary determination and cluster head role rotation is governed by the cluster heads residual energy level. The algorithm favors more powerful nodes over the weaker ones thus makes local energy balancing to prolong the lifetime of the entire sensor network at a very low energy overhead. The proposed algorithm has realized near ideal local energy balancing. The proposed algorithm is also extended to achieve global energy balancing by introducing a mix strategy of communication (multi-hop and direct) from cluster head to base station. The research shows that the algorithm performance is in line with the desired objectives using analytical proofs to back the simulation test results. Further, the research proposes an analytical framework in determining the cluster distribution of the presented algorithm. Subsequently, the framework was extended to other similar types of distributed clustering algorithms. Finally, the research proposes an analytical technique in nding optimum algorithm parameters such as the cluster head message broadcasting range and cluster head role rotation.
To Arosha the Love of My Life
iii
Acknowledgements
I am eternally indebted to my research supervisor Dr. Chulantha Kulasekere for his guidance, support, and encouragement during this challenging research. His unique approach in analyzing problems and nding novel solutions inspired me to widen my intellectual horizon. My life has been enriched professionally, academically, and personally by working closely with him. I am also thankful to Prof. Saman Halgamuge, the Assistant Dean of Melbourne School of Engineering, University of Melbourne; Prof. Keerthi Walgama, the Director of Academic Aairs and former Head, Department of Engineering Mathematics, University of Peradeniya; Prof. (Mrs.) Dileeka Dias of University of Moratuwa; and Dr. Ajith Pasqual, the Research Coordinator of University of Moratuwa for their invaluable suggestions and support at the thesis evaluation. My special thanks are also due to Prof. (Mrs.) Indra Dayawansa of University of Moratuwa for her encouragement and support throughout this research. Further, I like to acknowledge the support given by Eng. Kithsiri Samarasinghe, Dr. Ranga Rodrio and all other sta of University of Moratuwa. It was not an easy task to carry out a research of this nature, while being actively engaged with the industry. Zone24x7 Inc, my employer, provided the support and exibility I needed to complete this research as expected. For this, I am grateful to Mr. Llavan Fernando, the CEO, Mr. Manjula Dissanayake, the Vice President and the entire team of Zone24x7. All the guidance, commitment, and perseverance I had, would not have made this thesis possible, if not for the support, endurance, and understanding of my family. Thus, my utmost gratitude goes to my loving wife, two daughters, my parents and parents in-law. Prasanna Sankalpa Gamwarige University of Moratuwa October 2010
iv
Contents
Acknowledgements List of Figures List of Tables Nomenclature CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Current Challenges in Sensor Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Direction of the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Clustering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Challenges in Cluster based Self Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope of the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organization of the Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iv ix xii xiii 1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 10 12 13
CHAPTER 2 Related Work 2.1 2.2 Overview of Energy Aware Communication Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . Wireless Sensor Network Clustering Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 2.2.2 LEACH: Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . LEACH-D: Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy with Deterministic Cluster Head Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.3 SEP: A Stable Election Protocol for Clustered Heterogeneous Wireless Sensor Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.4 2.2.5 HEED: Hybrid Energy Ecient Distributed Clustering . . . . . . . . ANTCLUST based Energy-Ecient Clustering Method for Data Gathering in Sensor Networks 2.2.6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
15 16
16
EDAC: Energy Driven Adaptive Clustering Data Collection Protocol in Wireless Sensor Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v 17
2.2.7
MEDIC: Medium-Contention Based Energy-Ecient Distributed Clustering Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 19 20 20 22 23 23 27 28
2.3
Anatomy of a Wireless Sensor Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 Ultra Low Power Micro Controllers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Low Power Wireless Transceivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Battery and Optional Energy Harvesting Techniques . . . . . . . . .
2.4
Sensor Network Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.4.3 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Energy Consumption Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lifetime of the Sensor Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER 3 Proposed Energy Balanced Distributed Clustering Algorithm 30 3.1 3.2 Objectives of the EDCR Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview of the Algorithm 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 32 32 33 35 35 38 40 40 43 43 44 49
Cluster Head Candidacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cluster Head Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cluster Head Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Algorithm Pseudo Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER 4 Performance Analysis of the EDCR Algorithm 4.1 4.2 Accuracy and Complexity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cluster Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 4.2.4 4.2.5 4.2.6 Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Probability Density Function of Cluster Area, . . . . . . . . . . . Derivation of Expected Cluster Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expected Number of Clusters, E [k ] of a Rectangular Deployment Area 51 Expected Number of Clusters, E [k ] of a Circular Deployment Area . Average Distance between Neighboring Cluster Heads . . . . . . . . 52 53
CHAPTER 5 Optimization of the Control Parameters for EDCR Algorithm 5.1 Optimum Cluster Head Candidacy Broadcasting Range, Ropt . . . . . . . . 5.1.1 5.1.2 Circular Deployment Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rectangular Deployment Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 54 57 58
vi
5.2
Computation of Optimum Cluster Head Rotation Trigger Function Parameter, copt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5.3
Estimation of Second Degree Neighborhood Determining Parameter
for a 71 78 79 80 81 84 86 92 94 96
Given Wireless Sensor Network Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER 6 Global Energy Balancing 6.1 EDCR in Multi-hop Network Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.1 6.1.2 6.1.3 6.2 Identication of Next-hop Cluster Head . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Determination of Ropt and copt for EDCR-MH . . . . . . . . . . . . . Limitations of the EDCR-MH Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EDCR-EB Algorithm 6.2.1 6.2.2
Determination of Ropt and copt for EDCR-EB . . . . . . . . . . . . . Application Guidelines of EDCR-EB Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER 7 Simulation Results 7.1 Comparison of Performance of EDCR Algorithm with Similar Class of Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.1 7.1.2 7.2 7.3 7.4 Results for the Free Space Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Results for the Simplied Multi-path Fading Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
97 98 104 110 111
Cluster Distribution and Cluster Head Location in a Cluster
Applicability of EDCR algorithm in Non Rectangular Deployment Regions Accuracy of the Analytical Framework Proposed in Finding R for an Expected Cluster Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
115
7.5
Validation of the Analytical Techniques for Determining the EDCR Algorithm Parameters for Maximizing the Network Lifetime . . . . . . . . . . . 7.5.1 7.5.2 Validation of Ropt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 120 122 124 125 129 134 144 144 144
Validation of copt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.6 7.7
Performance Evaluation of EDCR-MH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Performance Evaluation of EDCR-EB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER 8 Conclusion and Future Direction References APPENDIX A A.1 Expected Distance between Two Immediate Neighboring Nodes . . . . . . . A.2 Energy Optimum Cluster Head Location in an Arbitrary Cluster . . . . . . vii
A.3 Global Re-clustering or Local Cluster Head Role Delegation . . . . . . . . .
145
viii
List of Figures
1.1 2.1 2.2 2.3
Browsing physical environment over the Internet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Non uniform cluster formation in LEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Anatomy of a wireless sensor node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current consumption of CC1101 transceiver for dierent Tx power output levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2 14 20
22 27 29 37 37 39 45 46 46 47 58
2.4 2.5 3.1 3.2 3.3 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 5.1 5.2
Radio energy dissipation model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of live sensor nodes at the end of each round . . . . . . . . . . . .
Second degree neighborhood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

t Re-clustering sequence of cluster head i when Eres i i
. . . . . . . . . .
State change of a sensor node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Smallest possible cluster size

3 3R 2 2
3R2 2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3 3R2 2
Largest possible closed packed cluster size Cluster area more than Proof of PB ( >
3 3R2 ) 2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
create uncovered region shaded in gray . . .
0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dierent scenarios of rectangular area with BS at the centre . . . . . . . . . Dierent scenarios of rectangular area with BS at the centre of the long side of perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
60 61 63 67 72 74 78 79
5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 6.1 6.2
total vs R curve for a given WSN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Typical J Lifetime of WSN with respect to the change of c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Round robin CH selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Constraints for maximum inter CH distance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Movement of a and b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Single-hop cluster based WSN organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Multi-hop cluster based WSN organization ix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 7.1
Area where CHs would never relay through another CH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Determination of Expected number of relay packets by an average CH, p =
A2 A1
81 82 85 87
. . . . . . . .
WSN deployment regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Live Nodes vs. Data Transmission Rounds for the simulation experiments using free space communication model - FS1 . . . . . . . . . .
100
7.2
Number of Live Nodes vs. Data Transmission Rounds for the simulation experiments using free space communication model - FS2 . . . . . . . . . . 101
7.3
7.4
7.5
Number of Live Nodes vs. Data Transmission Rounds for the simulation experiments using simplied multi-path fading communication model - MF1 105
7.6
7.7
7.8
7.9
Node distribution among all clusters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
110 112 113 114 118 118
7.10 EDCR performance under Case NR1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.11 EDCR performance under Case NR2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.12 EDCR performance under Case NR3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.13 E [k ]A vs for dierent R - 200 200m2 square deployment area . . . . . 7.14 E [k ]A vs for dierent R - 100m radius circular deployment area . . . . .
7.15 Typical Average Lifetime vs R curve for a given sensor network requirement 121 7.16 Dierent Lifetime curves of a WSN for dierent c: Case 1 . . . . . . . . . . 7.17 Dierent Lifetime curves of a WSN for dierent c: Case 2 . . . . . . . . . . 7.18 Lifetime comparison EDCR and EDCR-MH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.19 Far end nodes die rst with EDCR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.20 Nodes close to BS die rst with EDCR-MH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.21 Lifetime comparison between EDCR, EDCR-MH and EDCR-EB . . . . . . 7.22 First set of nodes die irrespective of node location in EDCR-EB . . . . . . . x 123 123 124 126 126 127 127
A.1 Cluster head location in global re-clustered cluster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.2 Cluster head location in local cluster head role rotation . . . . . . . . . . .
146 147
xi
List of Tables
7.1
Summary of results for the free space model (Unit: Number of data transmission rounds) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
7.2
Summary of results for the multi-path fading model (Unit: Number of data transmission rounds) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 110 116
7.3 7.4 7.5
Distribution of member nodes among dierent clusters . . . . . . . . . . . . Sample network deployment requirements for EDCR . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison of actual average number of clusters and expected value of it for EDCR algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
117
7.6
Comparison of actual average neighbor cluster head distance and theoretically expected value, DCH CH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
7.7
Comparison of the average lifetime with Ropt against actual maximum lifetime121
xii
Nomenclature
ampf s ampmp
Radio propagation attenuation constant in Free Space model. Radio propagation attenuation constant in Multi-path Fading model. The distance dierentiates the Free Space propagation eect and Multi-path Fading propagation eect in Simplied Multi-path Fading model. This is given by d0 =
ampf s ampmp
d0
Eelec
The energy spent on transmitter and receiver circuits in signal processing of one bit.
EDA
Energy cost of data aggregation. Bit length of a data packet.
Pi
[0, 1] represents the relative position of the node i with respect to the other nodes in its neighborhood in terms of its residual energy level.
Nj
The set of sensor nodes within a neighborhood of radius from node j excluding the node j .
H Mi
The set of all cluster heads at a give moment. The set of member nodes in a cluster headed by cluster head i including itself.
SN i
t Eres i t Eres i t=
Cluster head node is second degree neighborhood. Residual energy of node i at any given time instance t. Residual energy of node i at time t = . Dynamic energy threshold value of a given cluster head node i which becomes a cluster head at time t = . When its residual energy drops below this value, it calls for a new cluster head selection phase with the help of the base station.
dist(x, y ) PRxi,j
Distance between nodes x and y . The received signal strength of the signal transmitted by node i at the node j.
PT xi R Ropt
The transmitted signal strength of a data packet by node i. Cluster head candidacy broadcasting range. The value of R which will minimize the total data gathering energy of one round.
The cluster head role rotation triggering dynamic energy threshold level calculation parameter.
copt E [k ]
The value of c which will maximize the sensor network lifetime. Expected (average) number of clusters for a planned wireless sensor network setup.
DCH CH (di,j )
Expected (average) distance between two neighboring cluster heads. Compressibility of the data of node j at node i due to the correlation of data of node i and j . 1 (di,j ) 0.
Exponential data correlation model coecient such that (di,j ) = 1 edi,j . Deployed sensor node density. Assumed these nodes are uniform randomly deployed in a given area resulting a Poisson point distribution with density .
N N Hi dT H
Total number of nodes deployed in a given area A. N = A. Set of all the neighbor cluster heads of a given cluster head node i. Cluster head nodes whose distance to base station is less than dT H would not relay through another cluster head. This is used with EDCR-MH algorithm to save the energy of cluster head closest to base station by reducing the burden of serving closest cluster heads who can directly reach base station without incurring much energy cost.
ECH
The total energy spent by a cluster head in a given data transmission round for useful work.
EnonCH
The total energy spent by a non cluster head node in a given data transmission round for useful work.
ECHoh
The energy overhead that a cluster head node has to spend in each cluster setup phase.
EnonCHoh
The energy overhead that a non cluster head node has to spend in each cluster setup phase.
xiv
T i
This is an energy level calculated at the beginning of any new cluster formation phase in EDCR-EB algorithm. Given cluster head i stops forwarding any incoming relay packets at this pre calculated energy level.
ai
T for each cluster head i making global energy This is used in calculating i
balancing.
xv
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Sensor networks have become a popular research area during the past decade with the increase in availability of sensor nodes in the market [1]. This is a direct result of recent developments in inexpensive and low power micro sensor technology, radio communication electronics and processors. Currently these sensor nodes (also known as motes) are produced targeting various military and civilian applications [1]-[2]. Intruder detection, replacement for anti-personnel land mines, and sniper localization systems are some identied potential applications in the military domain. DARPA SensIT [3], DARPA NEST [4] are some projects sponsored by Department of Defense of USA in this area. Hazard environment monitoring [5], habitat monitoring (E.g. Micro climate monitoring at James Reserve, bird nest monitoring at Great Duck Island)[6], browsing physical environment (Sensor Network Macroscope [7], Figure 1.1), disaster monitoring systems [8], structural health monitoring [9], building indoor environment monitoring [10], road trac monitoring [11] and agriculture [12] are some possible areas of sensor networks in civil applications. Major Semiconductor companies like Intel have collaborated with many leading research institutions in exploring dierent aspects of sensor networks including potential applications and unsolved issues [13]. At the same time, giant software companies like Microsoft have shown interest in the sensor networks eld as seen in [14]. In general, sensor nodes used in large wireless sensor networks are less reliable and inaccurate compared to their high end macro sensor counterparts. However, reliability and usefulness of such sensor nodes can be improved using data aggregation from multiple sensors [15]. This has led to applications using wireless sensor networks with hundreds to thousands of nodes being used to achieve high reliability. These sensor nodes are equipped with low energy batteries. This research considers an extreme use of wireless sensor networks. For such an application environments, once sensor nodes are deployed, upgrading or servicing of a malfunctioning node due to technical faults would be prohibited. Similarly, 1
Physical Environment can be browsed over the Internet

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + +
Internet
TCP/IP over GPRS / Satellite connection / Terrestrial Micro Wave Link
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + +
Gateway
Base Station
Sensor Mote
Figure 1.1: Browsing physical environment over the Internet
the replacement of batteries is also not possible [16]. As a result, lifetime of a sensor node will come to an end as it exhausts its available battery energy. Hence, conserving battery energy is a critical need in a wireless sensor network. There are many other factors that limit the lifetime of a sensor node. However, this research focuses on the battery energy optimization and the factors that inuence such optimization. Radio communication is found to be the largest energy consuming factor of a sensor node. Therefore, if one requires to prolong the lifetime of a sensor node, an energy ecient data transmission mechanism is the key as explained in [17]. In what follows, current challenges that are faced by researchers in the wireless sensor network area are discussed.
1.1
Current Challenges in Sensor Networks
Researchers have identied many unsolved issues in wireless sensor networks [1],[17]-[18]. However, the key concept that many research have focused on is the limited energy in a sensor node and the rapid consumption of energy depending on the network design [19][41]. In general, existing sensor nodes equipped with 2 AA batteries, each one with about 2000 mAhr at 1.5 V energy, at the time of deployment, will result in the average life time ranging from a couple of days to an year which depends on the mode of operation. However, in reality, these sensors are placed in remote locations and the life time depends on activities 2
such as the inter node communication which drains the battery power. Increase of battery energy density, harness of reusable energy and minimization of energy usage are dierent ways of addressing the lack of adequate battery power during operation. Increasing battery density will increases the physical size of the sensor node and harnessing reusable energy will make the sensor less cost eective. Hence, both these options are deemed undesirable. The only viable option remaining would be to redesign the network and the communication protocol within this network. This is more cost eective and an attractive solution. Most sensor network applications require hundreds or even thousands of nodes being deployed in ad-hoc fashion to collect data from the distributed nodes to a central location. This ad-hoc deployment of nodes prevents the pre-planning of the network organization, requiring it to self organize. These self organizing algorithms must be distributed and scalable to accommodate dynamic changes in the network such as death of existing nodes and addition of new nodes. Further, the self organizing algorithms must also be aware of the energy limitation of the network and minimize energy overhead. The direction of this research is presented in the next section.
1.2
Direction of the Research
The current research attempts to address the energy consumption problem and the self organization issue of ad-hoc deployed large wireless sensor network to periodically collect data from the sensor eld to a central location called base station (BS). Energy consumption problem is addressed by minimizing the use of energy, especially in radio communication. In the current research context of wireless sensor networks existing radio communication protocols such as IEEE 802.11 failed to be applicable for the following reasons. These protocols do not address unnecessary drain of energy which can result due to over hearing, packet collisions, cross communication, and overhead of control, duplicate, and redundant data packets. Additionally, communication protocols such as 802.11 are developed targeting applications with one-to-one (unicast) communication, one-to-many (multicast) communication, and one-to-all (broadcast) communication. On the other hand, most of wireless sensor application requirement is based on collecting data from the distributed sensors to one central location i.e. many-to-one. This is known as convergecast communication [42]. There are dierent data transferring techniques found in literature which addresses the convergecast communication scenario. Direct Transmission [19]-[20], Minimum Transmission Energy Multi-hop Routing [19]-[20] and Clustering [19]-[35],[43] are the main techniques. Direct Transmission tends to deplete the energy of nodes which are at a distance 3
from the base station far more rapidly compared to those nodes that are closer to the base station resulting long range transmission. Direct transmission also suers with hidden node problem [44], considerable collisions and retransmissions resulting in waste of energy. On the other hand, in Minimum Transmission Energy Multi-hop Routing, a node transmits to its closest neighbor node in the direction of the base station. This transmission is continued via closest neighbor in the direction of base station until this packet reaches the nal destination. Here, the nodes that are in close proximity to the base station tend to die much faster than nodes found far away. This is a direct result of the increased load handling of a sensor node closer to the base station in relaying large amount of data packets to the base station. Further, multi-hop routing requires all nodes to keep idle listening resulting in additional burden being placed on all nodes. A nal conventional protocol for wireless sensor networks is clustering, where nodes are organized into disjoint clusters, in such a way, that each cluster consists of one cluster head (CH) and multiple member nodes [16]. These member nodes communicate with the local cluster head and these cluster heads transmit the data to the global base station where it is accessed by the end-user. This greatly reduces the distance that nodes need to transmit their data, since typically the cluster head is close to all the nodes in the cluster. The current research will primarily concern itself with clustering and the protocols related to clustering, to arrive at an energy ecient communication algorithm that will prolong the lifetime of the entire sensor network.
1.3
Clustering
Most of the recent research has identied cluster based node organization and data aggregation techniques as the best methods to answer issues related to energy aware self-organizing ad-hoc networks due to the following reasons [16]. The rst reason is, the energy consumption in wireless data transmission scales proportionally to the nth power of the distance between transmission and receiving nodes. Therefore, cluster-based data gathering mechanisms eectively saves energy by reducing the required transmission distance of most of the nodes. Member nodes of a cluster will expend a small amount of energy to transmit information to the nearby cluster head who will aggregate this information and undertake to transmit it to the distant base station. The extra energy expended by the cluster head in aggregating is minimal, compared to the collective energy that would be expended by each node if they were to directly contact the base station. The second reason is, the cluster based data gathering scenario can also save energy by reducing data collisions. The next 4
reason is, clustering coupled with Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) protocol can reduce the energy needed to keep the regular member node receiver circuits on for idle listening [45]. In general, physically close sensors have highly correlated data. Hence, it is also possible to reduce the transmission of redundant data by cluster based data aggregation with relatively high data compression of correlated data. This is also a reason for clustering. Further, clustering helps to route aggregated data of each cluster to base station through an overlay among cluster heads which require lesser amount of total transmission energy. Cluster head nodes consume more energy than other nodes, as a result of its data aggregation function. These functions include receiving data from its cluster members, fusing data to reduce the size of a packet, and sending the aggregated data to a base station. As a result of rapid energy dissipation of cluster heads, they tend to die much faster than non cluster head nodes. One can extend the lifetime of a cluster head node by specically supplying them with more energy or evenly rotating the cluster head role based on the residual energy. In literature, these high energy nodes are called advanced nodes. It is possible to incorporate several advanced nodes in the sensor bed at the time of deployment. However, selection of advanced nodes as cluster heads during normal operation is a much more dicult task. In practice, the sensor networks are setup in an ad-hoc fashion, hence conventional clustering algorithms would perform poorly. The second choice is to rotate the cluster head role among all sensors. This would help to evenly distribute the burden of high energy requirement of the cluster heads task among all nodes which will result in an even lifetime for all nodes. This has led to most wireless sensor network organizing protocols to use dynamic clustering, where the cluster head role is rotated.
1.4
Challenges in Cluster based Self Organization
Any wireless sensor network clustering algorithm faces two challenges [46]. The rst is how should clusters be formed?, the second is how many clusters are required? The rst question includes two aspects: how to select the cluster heads? and how to associate a non cluster head node to a cluster head? Based on how these questions are answered, existing clustering schemes can be classied as follows. Clustering scheme can operate as centralized (e.g. BCDCP [25], EGSOM [47]) or distributed (e.g. LEACH [20]); static or dynamic (e.g. ANTCLUST based [26]); a scheme can be applicable only for homogeneous energy networks (i.e. all nodes in the network have same level of energy at deployment) (e.g. LEACH) or even for a heterogeneous energy network (i.e. during initial deployment nodes have dierent amounts of energy. For example, application of a new clustering algorithm 5
to an existing network or addition of new nodes to an existing network. e.g. HEED [27]); the cluster head selection is weight 1 independent (i.e. randomized, e.g. LEACH) or weight associated (e.g. HEED); procedure for cluster head selection can be nalized in one step (e.g. LEACH) or iteratively (e.g. HEED, MEDIC [48]). Each of the above categories has their own advantages and disadvantages. In general, any algorithm with complex control messaging will have overhead of control and coordination mechanism which will increase the energy consumption. However as a result of this complex control messaging, all nodes will die at the same time but relatively sooner. Due to the low complexity, good feasibility, and high eectiveness, the class of dynamic, distributive, and randomized (DDR) clustering algorithms are promising in providing energy-ecient, load balanced, scalable and robust communication in wireless sensor networks. This is the main reason that LEACH [19] and its derivatives (such as SEP [24]) have attracted immense attention and have become a well studied and popularly referred baseline in the current research context [46]. However, DDR class of algorithms such as LEACH have following issues. 1. Poor performance in heterogeneous energy networks 2. Non-uniform cluster formation 3. High degree of uncertainty in producing required number of cluster heads 4. Issue related to single cluster head serving the entire wireless sensor network 5. A node with insucient residual energy may be chosen as a cluster head when neighboring nodes with more battery power is available Complex cluster setup algorithms like HEED has addressed most of the above issues at a cost of high energy overhead resulting a negative impact to life time. In addition, complex algorithms like ANTCLUST base have unacceptable assumptions such as location awareness of nodes using GPS or some form of localization technique which would increase the cost and energy requirement. Most of the existing algorithms such as LEACH, HEED and ANTCLUST use time driven cluster head role rotation mechanisms. In this method, the role of cluster head will be changed after a constant predetermined number of data gathering rounds i.e. the cluster head role is rotated after every T period which is predetermined. Determination of the
Typically weight is computed based on residual energy, distance, size of neighborhood etc. depending on the algorithm.
1
optimum time period T is crucial. Typically T is found at the design stage and does not change at run time. Since T is xed, re-clustering cannot be done adaptively to accommodate unforeseen environmental changes which would inuence the depletion of battery energy of a cluster head node. As a result, this method is more vulnerable to environmental changes. However, use of a heuristic approach with dynamic local information in deciding the cluster head role rotation would result in a more robust system. As a result, researchers feel, residual energy based cluster head role rotation algorithms would perform better. In this method, cluster head rotation trigger threshold level is dierent for dierent nodes, and dierent for the same node at dierent instances, depending on the node energy level. The dynamic nature of energy based cluster head rotation ensures that even if all the nodes have only little energy left, the system still works. Algorithms like EDAC [35] proposes an energy driven cluster head role rotation mechanism. Further, authors of [35] have shown that energy based cluster head role rotation is far superior to predetermined time based method, especially in heterogeneous energy sensor networks, and networks with varying trac patterns including variable size data packets. EDAC is an algorithm which extends the LEACH with energy driven cluster head rotation instead of predetermined time driven method. However EDAC has only addressed this issue from LEACH. Hence, EDAC also suers with the problems found in LEACH resulting in bad life time performance of the EDAC algorithm most cases. According to the authors knowledge, existing literature does not provide a method of nding a suitable energy level to rotate the cluster head role to optimize the wireless sensor network lifetime. This too is an important parameter if one wants to extend the lifetime of a wireless sensor network. Its a common design level requirement to plan and set the parameters of the clustering algorithm of an ad-hoc wireless sensor network to produce on average E [k ] number of clusters in the given area of interest, where each cluster would have E [n] number of nodes. This requires N (= E [k ] E [n]) number of nodes to be uniform randomly deployed in the area of interest. This indicates the importance of determining the cluster distribution with respect to algorithm parameters at the system planning stage of a given application. Selective replacement of batteries or nodes is not practical for a randomly deployed ad-hoc wireless sensor network. Therefore, it is highly desirable to ensure all nodes deplete their energy at the same pace, so that all nodes die together and a new wireless sensor network could be deployed as a replacement. In addition, it is highly desirable to maximize the time gap between such deployments to reduce the total cost. In what follows, the scope of this research is dened.
1.5
Scope of the Research
A brief discussion of the research challenges in the ad-hoc deployed energy constrained wireless sensor networks was given in Sections 1.1-1.4. Given this background, the scope of this research can be dened as follows: Improved energy ecient distributed clustering algorithm This research proposes an improved energy ecient distributed cluster based self organization algorithm for ad-hoc deployed wireless sensor network for periodic data gathering. This algorithm will address the issues identied in existing algorithms. The proposed dynamic distributed clustering algorithm selects the node with the highest residual energy in a given local neighborhood as the cluster head by using local information. Rest of the nodes join the closest and the highest energy available cluster head from its neighborhood. The cluster head role is rotated based on residual energy level of cluster heads. Thereby the system guarantees local energy balancing. Further, proposed cluster head role rotation should be done eciently to reduce the overall energy overhead while guaranteeing fair local energy balancing. The required number of clusters should be well distributed in the eld while each cluster head should be positioned at a location in a given cluster which would minimize the overall energy cost of the cluster. These should be realized while keeping the complexity of the algorithm minimum, as it would help to reduce the overhead of control and coordination messages of the entire wireless sensor network. Further, the proposed local energy balancing algorithm will be extended to realize global energy balancing, enabling it as an ideal algorithm for large ad-hoc deployments in unreachable locations. Analytical framework to prove the eectiveness of the above algorithm This research proposes an analytical framework to prove the eectiveness and behavior of the proposed algorithm backed by simulation experiment results. This framework includes the analysis of cluster head distribution. The proposed framework can be easily extended to analyze the behavior of similar classes of other algorithms too. Design framework to optimize the algorithm parameters to increase lifetime Further, this research proposes an analytical framework in nding optimum values of the algorithm parameters which maximize the entire wireless sensor network lifetime. These 8
analytical results are backed by simulation results.
1.6
Organization of the Thesis
The rest of the thesis is organized as follows. Chapter 2 presents related literature in energy aware self organization of ad-hoc deployed wireless sensor networks for periodic data gathering applications. This chapter also discusses the sensor network model to be used in this work. Chapter 3 presents the core of the proposed energy aware distributed clustering algorithm, which achieves perfect energy balancing among nodes in a local neighborhood with minimum energy overhead. The performance of the proposed algorithm is analyzed in Chapter 4. This analysis covers the correctness, complexity and behavior of the algorithm including an analysis of the cluster density for given set of algorithm parameters. Chapter 5 presents analytical techniques in nding the proposed algorithm parameters to optimize the sensor network lifetime. Chapter 6 extends the proposed algorithm to achieve global energy balancing. Chapter 7 presents the simulation results of the proposed algorithm. Finally, Chapter 8 concludes the thesis and provides directions for future research.
CHAPTER 2
Related Work
This chapter will rst summarize the related research work in energy aware ad-hoc deployed wireless sensor network organization targeting an application, which requires periodic data gathering from sensor nodes to base station. Based on these related work, a wireless sensor network model will be built. This model will be used in the rest of the research.
2.1
Overview of Energy Aware Communication Protocols
The current research considers an application of eld monitoring with an ad-hoc deployed stationary wireless sensor network, which gathers data from all sensor nodes to a base station at regular intervals using low power, low bit rate radio modules [42] such as TI CC1100 [49]. These sensor networks consist of hundreds to thousands of ad-hoc deployed sensor nodes, each powered by an energy limited batteries. It is assumed that sensor nodes are not maintained after deployment, meaning, energy depleted nodes are not selectively replaced. However in such a situation, additional sensor nodes can be deployed if necessary in an ad-hoc fashion. Structural health monitoring, habitat monitoring, hazard environment monitoring and micro weather stations are some applications that fall into this type of wireless sensor networks. Such wireless sensor networks share many similarities of communication technologies with conventional ad-hoc deployed wireless networks. Yet, there are some vital dierences between these two networks. Dense deployment, energy constraint and many to one communication are some of the notable dierences. As a result, the protocols developed for traditional ad-hoc deployed wireless networks are not necessarily well suited to the unique features of wireless sensor networks [48]. Therefore, energy ecient self organizing and data gathering are the major aspects to be addressed in a wireless sensor network protocol of this nature [50]. 10
A variety of energy aware self organization and data communication protocols are given in literature. One such technique is direct transmission where all nodes directly communicate with the base station. This is a sensible method as low power radio transceivers such as CC1100 has a comparable energy consumption for both Receiving (Rx) and Transmitting (Tx) modes (CC1100 Rx 15 mA, Tx 0 dBm 15 mA / +10 dBm 30 mA [49]). Unfortunately this method is not suitable for densely deployed wireless sensor network applications, as it would increase the packet collisions which will result in high energy dissipation due to retransmissions, hidden node problem [44] etc. Further, as a result of long range transmission, this method has a negative impact on nodes located far away from the base station compared to the nodes located close to the base station. An alternative to direct transmission is minimum transmission energy, which is an extension to traditional shortest path rst or minimum hops routing [48]. In this method, multi-hop is preferred to a single-hop, if the multiple short distance transmissions costs less energy than a single long distance transmission. In minimum transmission energy method, the nodes that are in close proximity to the base station tend to die much faster than nodes found far away from the base station [19]. This is a direct result of the increase in load handling by a sensor node closer to the base station, due to assisting all other nodes in relaying their data packets to the base station. Further, multi-hop communication requires all nodes to keep idle listening, resulting in additional undue burden for all nodes. Third technique is chain based node organisation method. PEGASIS [50] is one of the well referred derivatives of this technique. Formation of the optimum chain of nodes is similar to well known traveling salesman problem [51]. PEGASIS produces a near optimal chain by sensor nodes themselves in distributed manner using a greedy algorithm [52] based on node location information and global knowledge of the network. Even though chain formation algorithm is complex, it is done only once for the entire life time. Once this chain is formed, each node is only communicating with its neighbor in the chain. All nodes will aggregate their data with the incoming data packet from the neighboring node before sending to the next node in the chain. At any given round, there will be one leader in the chain, whose responsibility is to directly transfer the aggregated nal data packet to the base station. In other words, PEGASIS uses only one node in the chain to transmit to the base station, instead of multiple nodes with previous two types. Leadership is rotated among all nodes, such that, each node gets only one chance per round. Following issues are identied with PEGASIS. It requires all nodes to have a global knowledge of the entire network. Hence, the complexity of the algorithm increases with the increase size of the network.
11
Therefore, there is a clear scalability issue. Similarly, the algorithm depends on the location information. This would increase the hardware complexity of nodes. PEGASIS algorithm expects all nodes to be perfectly synchronized for its operation. Further, algorithm assumes perfect data compressibility i.e. all bit data packets can be compressed to a single data
packet of . However, this may not be a reasonable assumption. When this assumption is relaxed, the total transmission energy of one bit would be signicant, compared to direct or minimum transmission energy method with perfect synchronization. A nal conventional energy aware protocol for wireless sensor networks is based on clustering, where nodes are organized into disjoint clusters in such a way, that each cluster consists of one cluster head and multiple member nodes [19]-[31]. These member nodes communicate with the local cluster head and these cluster heads transmit the data to the base station. Some of the advantages of cluster based wireless sensor network protocols as given in [19]-[31] are as follows. Clustering greatly reduces the distance that a node needs to transmit their data, since the cluster head is located close to all nodes in the cluster compared to the base station. In general, physically close sensors have highly correlated information. Further, clustering helps to reduce the transmission of redundant data by cluster based data aggregation with relatively high compressibility of correlated data. In addition, cluster based data gathering can save energy by reducing data collisions [16]. More importantly, clustering couple with TDMA can reduce the energy consumption in keeping the regular member node receiver circuits on for idle listening [45]. Finally, clustering helps to routing through an overlay among cluster heads, which have a relatively small network diameter.
2.2
Wireless Sensor Network Clustering Algorithms
As discussed in the previous chapter, cluster head consumes relatively large amount of energy compared to regular nodes. Hence, a capable node has to be elected as the cluster head. Further, cluster head role should be rotated among all sensor nodes. This would help to evenly distribute the burden of high energy required cluster heads task among all nodes, and have an equal lifetime for all nodes. What follows would give a brief description of existing wireless sensor network clustering algorithms in line with cluster head selection and rotation and their overall performance is given.
12
2.2.1
LEACH: Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy
LEACH [19]-[20] is a distributed cluster based data communication algorithm. It uses the hybrid CDMA/TDMA technique as the multiple access control mechanism. Each cluster has its own Spread Spectrum code so that the interference between clusters is minimized. For intra cluster communications, TDMA slots are assigned for each member to minimize media contention. The LEACH algorithm periodically rotates the role of cluster heads among all nodes to evenly distribute the energy dissipation rate. A pre-determined percentage of sensor nodes become cluster heads in LEACH. The probability of a node to become a cluster head is self determined in a manner, a sensor node, which has not become a cluster head recently is more likely to be a cluster head. The nodes that are selected to become cluster heads rst advertise their candidacy to the rest of the sensor nodes. Hearing the advertisements, each sensor node chooses the closest cluster head and registers itself as a cluster member. The cluster head prepares the TDMA schedule, which assigns a time slot for each member to periodically communicate with the cluster head and broadcast it among its cluster members. Eventually, clusters are formed and periodic data gathering from nodes start. During the data gathering phase, the sensor nodes periodically wake up, sense and update the results in the -bit length data packets to the cluster head in the allotted time slot before going back to sleep. Subsequently, each cluster head combines all -bit data into a single -bit message and sends it directly to the base station. LEACH has compared with Minimum Transmission Energy, Static Clustering and a centralized dynamic clustering algorithm similar to LEACH named LEACH-C where cluster heads are selected using the knowledge of all node locations and positions at the central base station in [19]. According to the comparison based on the simulation results, LEACH is far superior to Minimum Transmission Energy and Static Clustering. The performance of LEACH is only 40% below LEACH-C. Based on these results LEACH has shown that it is an attractive dynamic, distributed and randomized clustering algorithm for ad-hoc deployed wireless sensor networks. However, LEACH algorithm suers with following drawbacks. 1. LEACH algorithm does not perform well in heterogeneous energy sensor networks [53]. These networks have nodes with dierent amounts of initial residual energy. This is a direct result of the LEACH algorithm assuming a homogeneous energy sensor network at the time of initiating the algorithm. 2. The algorithm does not produce well distributed cluster heads [54]. LEACH can produce two or more adjacent cluster heads. This is illustrated in Figure 2.1. 13
Figure 2.1: Non uniform cluster formation in LEACH
3. Actual number of cluster heads produced by LEACH algorithm does not concentrate in a small range around the expected number. Further, there may a be chance that the entire sensor network being served with only one cluster head. This adverse eect is a result of self election of a node as a cluster head using random number. This eect increases the total energy consumption and reduces the eective lifetime of the sensor network. [46] 4. Cluster head broadcasting message has to cover the entire wireless sensor network. Hence this would require signicant energy compared to covering a local neighborhood. 5. The cluster head rotation is carried out after a predetermined constant number of normal operation rounds, i.e. in every T time units. If the number of data gathering rounds is too small then there will be a large cluster setup overhead. On the other hand if cluster setup happens after a large number of regular data gathering rounds, then the existing cluster heads would not have enough energy to function as regular sensor nodes after they relinquish the role of cluster head. Therefore, proper selection of the number of data rounds before cluster head role rotation is crucial for the network lifetime. Typically, this value is found at design stage and not changed in run time. Hence, this method is not exible in accommodating the unforeseen events, which would aect the energy dissipation rate or the battery energy content of a cluster head. As a result, this method is more vulnerable to such unforeseen events.
14
2.2.2
LEACH-D: Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy with Deterministic Cluster Head Selection
LEACH-D [22] extends LEACHs stochastic cluster head selection algorithm by a deterministic component of individual nodes residual energy compared to its initial energy at the time of the deployment of sensor network. This has resulted in 25% lifetime improvement of LEACH-D over LEACH as given in the simulation results [22]. However this deterministic component has failed to identify the relative energy level of a node compared to its neighbors. Hence, LEACH-D has failed to get the service of high energy nodes in favor of low energy ones as the energy demanding cluster heads in all occasions. Further LEACH-D also suers with the draw backs that have identied with LEACH as its an extension of LEACH.
2.2.3
SEP: A Stable Election Protocol for Clustered Heterogeneous Wireless Sensor Networks
SEP [24] is also an extension to the LEACH algorithm. It proposes the use of a small percentage of advanced nodes along with normal nodes. Then, it uses a technique to allocate these advanced nodes as cluster heads more often when compared to normal nodes, and thus try to prolong the overall network lifetime. The randomized rotation of cluster heads is weighted by the proportion of extra initial battery energy of the nodes. This weighting is such that SEP selects advanced nodes (1 + ) times more often than a normal node, where is the extra energy content incorporated into the advanced nodes. Rest of the SEP algorithm is identical to LEACH. According to the simulation results presented in the [24], SEP has taken full advantage of heterogeneity (i.e. extra energy of advance nodes), thus, the life time of the wireless sensor network has increased by 26% compared to LEACH. SEP-E [55] is an extension of SEP by introducing another node type named intermediate nodes, which serves as a bridge between the advanced nodes and the normal nodes as described above. Intermediate nodes are equipped with energy content between normal nodes and advanced nodes. Number of intermediate nodes is higher than advanced nodes and much lower than normal nodes. Rest of the SEP-E algorithm is identical to SEP. Simulation results given in [55] indicate that there is a slight increase in the stability of SEP-E over SEP and a signicant reduction of the instability of SEP-E. This is due to the introduction of the intermediate nodes to SEP-E, which acts as a bridge between the advanced nodes and the normal nodes in SEP-E, thus lowering the instability region. 15
While SEP and its derivatives have a wireless sensor network lifetime increase compared to LEACH, still they inherit many drawbacks identied with LEACH such as, random head election that cannot guarantee the desired number of cluster heads be elected or the elected heads be evenly positioned, cluster head candidacy needs to cover entire wireless sensor network and xed time based cluster head role rotation. Class of SEP algorithms cannot be used in a true random heterogeneous sensor networks. (Note : The SEP and SEP-E algorithms assume two and three types of energy nodes respectively. Hence, it cannot be considered a strict homogeneous network. On the other hand it also cannot be considered a heterogeneous network since random energies are not assigned to nodes.)
2.2.4
HEED: Hybrid Energy Ecient Distributed Clustering
HEED [27] periodically selects cluster heads according to a hybrid of their residual energy and a secondary parameter such as node proximity to its neighbors or the node degree (number of members assigned to a cluster head). HEED is also a distributed clustering algorithm. HEED has eliminated the non uniform cluster forming problem that was observed in LEACH and its derivatives. HEED requires cluster head announcement to cover only a local neighborhood. Furthermore, HEED algorithm has the ability to perform in a heterogeneous energy networks as it considers node residual energy in cluster head election. HEED uses a complex weight based cluster setup procedure, where cluster head is selected with many round of iterations. This has adversely resulted in the communication and coordination energy overhead during cluster setup. Hence, HEED itself admits in [27] that LEACH protocol expends less energy in clustering and produces longer lifetime than HEED. HEED too rotates cluster heads after a constant predetermined number of data gathering rounds. Hence, same vulnerabilities faced by LEACH on xed time based cluster head rotation are applicable to HEED.
2.2.5
ANTCLUST based Energy-Ecient Clustering Method for Data Gathering in Sensor Networks
ANTCLUST [26],[56]-[57] is an algorithm that considers the ant model of colonial closure to solve ad-hoc deployed wireless sensor network distributed clustering problem. It regards a sensor node (the object) as an ant and a cluster as a nest. In ANTCLUST, it is assumed that two randomly chosen objects meet. Based on their similarity threshold values, they create, merge, or delete clusters. By repeatedly conducting random meetings, clusters are appropriately organized, so that objects in the same cluster become more similar with one 16
another than those in dierent clusters. ANTCLUST algorithm elects a node with highest residual energy in a given neighborhood as the cluster head. Further, the algorithm guarantees no two nodes in a given neighborhood are cluster heads. Once cluster heads are elected, a set of randomly chosen non cluster head nodes referred as social sensors in the algorithm, broadcast their status information. The nodes which hear those broadcasts have the ability to get updated information about the neighbors. This is partly analogous to ant meetings. In ant meetings, both ants have the ability to get updated about the environment from the information exchange, whereas, in the sensor network, those sensors that hear the broadcast message get a chance to receive environment information from the other. Non cluster head nodes select their clusters based on the residual energy of the neighboring cluster heads, its distance to the neighboring cluster heads, and an estimation of the cluster size based on the information gathered from local meetings. Eventually, energy ecient clusters are formed, that result in an extension of the lifetime of the sensor network. This algorithm does not have non uniform cluster forming issue as with LEACH and its derivatives such as SEP. Further, this algorithm can be applied to heterogeneous energy networks. According to the simulation results presented in [26], the number of rounds in which more than 80% of the sensor nodes keep alive when ANTCLUST is used is 25% to 55% higher than that when LEACH is used. However, the ANTCLUST based clustering algorithm has the following limitations. 1. The algorithm requires prior knowledge of the location information of all sensor nodes. This assumption is not realistic considering the ad-hoc nature of the deployment of sensors and the limited availability of battery energy. (Use of GPS would increase hardware cost of motes and energy overhead in using GPS. Similarly, use of non GPS based methods such as triangulation would have adverse energy overhead.) 2. This algorithm too changes cluster heads after a predetermined period of time in normal operation similar to LEACH and HEED. However, this algorithm too does not mention how to identify optimal point in doing so.
2.2.6
EDAC: Energy Driven Adaptive Clustering Data Collection Protocol in Wireless Sensor Networks
Having a proper mechanism is essential for heterogeneous energy networks to conserve energy of nodes with less battery energy and to extract the advantage of nodes with more energy to prolong the lifetime of the network. EDAC [35] tries to achieve this objective by 17
an energy based cluster head selection and rotation mechanisms. A selected cluster head will function until its residual energy fall below a threshold and then cluster head rotation take place. Then a node with the highest residual energy in this cluster heads member base will take over the new cluster head role. Hence there will not be change of cluster boundaries. EDAC uses the approach outlined in the LEACH algorithm to determining the rst set of cluster heads, i.e. a xed proportion of nodes randomly declare themselves as cluster heads. This can lead to the creation of non-uniform clusters, especially since two or more close by nodes may now become cluster heads similar to the situation that occurred in the LEACH algorithm. Further, there can be situations where the number of clusters produced in the rst round is far apart from what is expected as mentioned in the drawbacks of LEACH. If the initial cluster setup phase has these problems, it can propagate to subsequent rounds with non-uniform clusters and/or non optimal number of clusters. Additionally, EDAC also expects nodes to know their position. When the nodes are ad-hoc deployed, this information can only be retrieved using GPS or triangulation technique. Both of these methods consume a signicant amount of energy. Simulation results presented in [35] shows that EDAC has about 10% better lifetime performance compared to LEACH in a homogeneous energy wireless sensor network. At the same time, in a heterogeneous energy wireless sensor network, overall lifetime performance of EDAC is 100% to 200% better than LEACH. This performance improvement in EDAC is a direct result of energy based cluster head role rotation. Whereas in LEACH, performance is low due to the predetermined xed time duration of the cluster head role rotation. Further, the simulation experiments of EDAC have shown that EDAC is good for varying data trac conditions (heavy and light trac with variable packet sizes) when compared to LEACH, as it concerns the residual energy of the nodes. Finally, [35] concludes that the energy based cluster head rotation is robust compared to xed time based cluster head rotation. However, here, they do not provide a method to nd a suitable value for the cluster head rotation triggering threshold.
2.2.7
MEDIC: Medium-Contention Based Energy-Ecient Distributed Clustering Algorithm
MEDIC [48] is designed to replace the cluster formation occurring at the beginning of each round in LEACH. It follows Dutch auction principle for its time eciency. There is no global broadcast in MEDIC. Each node rst broadcasts its vital information such 18
as residual energy at the maximum radio power level so that the knowledge is spread as widely as possible. Then, each node counts its neighbors and broadcasts the number of its neighbors at an adjusted power level corresponding to the desired cluster size. If a node has the potential to qualify as a cluster head compared to its neighbors, it will try to claim the cluster head role by broadcasting locally, which can be viewed as placing a bid for the cluster headship. The bidders will contend with each other until a node with satisfactory potential wins. By doing so, the head-to-be expels other possible heads in its neighborhood, and in consequence, the clusters with desired size are formed. The headship potential is an important parameter, which replaces the self-electing probability used in native LEACH. The nodes energy is important to determine its potential because the headship can be rotated among nodes by assigning more potential to the nodes with higher energy. Further, MEDIC take the number of neighbors into consideration as it is energy-ecient to let the node with more neighbors wins the headship. Once a node successfully sends out the headship claim, its neighbors must join it by sending Request to join. Since these requests can be eavesdropped by the neighbors, they can correspondingly correct their numbers of un-clustered neighbors. If a node nds all its neighbors are clustered, it can elect to be a cluster head by sending out a headship claim. Those nodes outside the neighborhood of existing cluster heads cannot join any clusters. When the public channel is idle again, which indicates there is no node in its neighborhood trying to join existing clusters, another round of auction will begin until all nodes are clustered. MEDIC is a complex algorithm which has managed to overcome undesired features of LEACH such as bad cluster head distribution. According to the simulation results MEDIC has a 25% better lifetime than LEACH.
2.3
Anatomy of a Wireless Sensor Node
A brief description of wireless sensor node anatomy is given in this section. The key features of the hardware parts of a node that would be useful in proposing a wireless sensor network self organization and communication algorithm will be discussed herein. A wireless sensor node consists of ultra low power micro controller (C), relevant sensor(s), very low power RF transceiver unit and battery with optional environment energy harvesting circuitry as shown in Figure 2.2.
19
Sensor(s)
Battary + Optional Environmental Energy Harvesting Device
Low Power RF Tranceiver
Figure 2.2: Anatomy of a wireless sensor node
2.3.1
Ultra Low Power Micro Controllers
TI MSP430 family, Microchip ultra low power PIC family, low power 8051 based implementations and Atmel AVR family micro controllers are widely used in experimental sensor nodes. Typically these micro controllers operational eciency is around 165 A/MIPS in active mode. Further, these micro controllers have multiple power modes. The lowest power mode consumes 0.1 A in RAM retention and 0.7 A in RTC mode [58]. It says that MSP430 requires less than 0.6 s to wake-up from low-power modes to active mode. These micro controllers are equipped with ADC, Comparators, Op-amps, Timers, RTC, Supply Voltage Supervisors, Watch Dogs and Temperature Sensors. Hence, they inherently support most of low power sensor interfacing and other requirements of a wireless sensor node.
2.3.2
Low Power Wireless Transceivers
There are many single chip ultra low power RF transceivers ideal for wireless sensor nodes in the market. Some of them are TI CC low power RF family [49], Atmel low power RF family [59], and Semtech SX low power family [60]. Most of these families have members which operate in sub 1 GHz bands and 2.4 GHz bands. All these family transceivers require only very few external passive components (one crystal, few capacitors, few inductors and an antenna) to complete the RF design. Some of the key features of these transceivers that are considered important for this study are discussed below. Most of those facts are derived from the TI CC1100 family data sheet [49]. Low power transceivers have congurable baud rates typically from 1.2 kBaud to 500 kBaud. Most of these transceivers support multiple modulation modes such as 2-FSK, 20
GFSK, MSK, OOK and ASK. They also have very low sleep mode current consumption (250 nA). Further, these transceivers have fast startup time (240 s) from sleep to Rx or Tx mode. The transceivers support Rx signal input sensitivity as low as -112 dBm with 1% packet error rate. The Rx mode current of them varies between 14 mA to 17 mA depending on the operating frequency, baud rate, input signal strength and temperature. Typically, these transceivers can be programmed to output -30 dBm to 12 dBm RF Tx power. Tx mode current consumption depends on the Tx output power level. Figure 2.3 gives an interpolated piecewise linear curve of currant consumption for dierent Tx output power levels. According to this, 10 dBm Tx power requires about 33 mA. Whereas -6 dBm requires only 16 mA. Hence, Rx mode power consumption is comparable to Tx mode power consumption. This results in idle listening having a negative eect on battery life. Therefore, these transceivers have automatic sleep-wake-sleep mode by which they generate interrupt to wake the micro controllers if there are any incoming packets. This feature is referred to as Wake-on-Radio. Wake-on-Radio support dierent duty cycles for this automatic Rx polling. These dierent duty cycles consume dierent amounts of power. According to the CC1100 family data sheet, one second automatic Rx poling would draw 10 A. Conversely, when it is set to poll every 15th second, the transceiver would draw 1.5 A. Further, these transceivers support multi channel selection. Hence, they can be used in frequency hopping spread spectrum (FHSS) or a multichannel protocol as the frequency diversity makes the system more robust with respect to interference from other systems operating in the same frequency band. This feature can be used to eliminate interference caused by neighboring cluster communication in wireless sensor network. These transceivers also have Receiver Signal Strength Indicators (RSSI) which is used to determine the relative distance of the sender as well as calculating the minimum required power to reach back the sender. Most of these RF transceivers consist of Programmable Carrier Sense Indicator. In addition, they have direct hardware support for Clear Channel Assessment which is used to indicate if the current channel is free or busy. This is very useful in CSMA/CA systems. Most of these transceiver chips have hardware Link Quality Indicators. This gives a metric of the current quality of the received signal. Further, there is a Programmable Preamble Quality Indicator for detecting preambles and improved protection against sync word detection in random noise. It should be noted that there are single package SoC with both micro controller and RF transceiver requiring very few additional components. Texas Instrument CC430 RF SoC Series provides both MSP430 micro controller core and RF module in one package.
21
35
Current Consumption (mA)
30
25
20
15
10 30
20
10
10
20
Output TX Power (dBm)
Figure 2.3: Current consumption of CC1101 transceiver for dierent Tx power output levels
Further Texas Instrument CC1110 is a combination of CC1100 RF transceiver and 8051 micro controller core in one package.
2.3.3
Battery and Optional Energy Harvesting Techniques
Proper selection of batteries and any supplementary energy harvesting mechanisms are crucial for long life of a wireless sensor node [61]. In theory, a 1000 mAh battery could support a processor consuming 10 mA for 100 hours. In practice, this is not always true. Voltage and current levels of the battery vary depending on how the energy is extracted from it because of battery chemistry. At the same time, as batteries discharge, their voltage drops. If the system is not tolerant to a decrease in voltage, it may not be possible to use the full rated capacity of the battery. For example, a 1.5 V Alkaline battery is not considered empty by the manufacturer until its voltage is only 0.8 V. There are three common battery technologies that are applicable to wireless sensor nodes - Alkaline, Lithium, and Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH). An AA Alkaline battery is rated as 2850 mAh at 1.5 V, but during operation it ranges from 1.65 to 0.8 V. With a volume of just 8.5 cm3 , it has an energy density of approx 1500 J/cm3 . Even though Alkaline batteries provide cheap and high capacity energy source, their large physical size and wide voltage range can be identied as drawbacks. Additionally, lifetimes beyond 5 years cannot be achieved in Alkaline batteries because of battery self-discharge. Lithium batteries provide an incredibly compact power source. The smallest versions 22
are just a few millimeters across. Additionally, they provide a constant voltage supply that decays little as the battery is drained. Devices that operate with Lithium batteries do not have to be as tolerant to voltage changes as devices that operate with Alkaline batteries. Additionally, unlike Alkaline batteries, Lithium batteries are able to operate at temperatures down to -400 C. Typical Lithium batteries has energy density of 2400 J/cm3 . One of the drawbacks of Lithium batteries is that they often have very low nominal discharge currents. NiMH is the third battery type. They have the benet of being easily rechargeable. The downside to rechargeable batteries is a signicant decrease in energy density. An AA size NiMH battery has approximately half the energy density of an Alkaline battery. Further, it should be noted that NiMH battery cells are 1.2 V. One other factor that should be noted for a long life of any of these batteries, is that the batteries should be used in duty cycles to allow recovery. In other words, the total lifetime of a battery being continuously used at a recommended current is far less than using it in a duty cycle, allowing the battery to recover during unused times. Optional environmental energy harvesting mechanisms, along with the batteries, are proposed in literature for wireless sensor nodes [62]-[63]. It is possible to use Solar, Seismic and Vibration to harvest energy from the operating environment. However, the cost and size of such a setup increases with the required level of power. Hence, even if an application decided to equip energy harvesting mechanisms, the power generation rate and usage rate may not be the same [63]. Therefore, the energy generated by such techniques has to be stored in rechargeable batteries or super capacitors. Environment energy harvesting is a complementing technique with clustering, where cluster head role is rotated to match the energy dissipation and generation rates.
2.4
Sensor Network Model
This section presents a wireless sensor network model to be used in the rest of this research. This model has derived from the existing related literature. The assumptions that have been considered with respect to this model are presented rst. Then, this section presents the energy consumption model of a wireless sensor node. Finally, a discussion on dierent wireless sensor network lifetime measurement matrices is carried out.
2.4.1
Assumptions
Practical wireless sensor networks are complex. Hence, researchers have looked at dierent aspects of wireless sensor networks with appropriate assumptions [1]. For the purpose 23
of this research, following preliminary assumptions are made to make the sensor network model mathematically tractable. These assumptions are in line with the previous literature [20],[24],[26] and [27]. 1. All sensor nodes are identical: It is assumed that all sensor nodes are equipped with identical micro controllers, radio communication equipment and same capacity batteries. 2. The Base Station has the ability to guide the existing cluster head rotation operation: This means that, whenever existing cluster head identies that it can no longer continue as a cluster head, it request the base station help to inform this among other cluster heads to start a new global cluster head selection phase. In other words, base station can reach any cluster head asynchronously and has the ability to command them. Cluster head to base station communication is contention based MAC. Further, the research assumes base station does not have any energy limitations. Moreover, the research assumes 100% reliability and availability of the base station due to many to one communication, where base station is the data sink. Hence, central point of failure is not applicable. 3. TDMA based data transmission is used for intra cluster communication: This implies that non cluster head sensor nodes periodically wake up and update their sensed data to the cluster head in their allocated TDMA time slot and goes back to sleep mode to preserve energy. TDMA is appropriate due to its simplicity, low overhead, short communication duty cycle, and zero packet collisions. In literature, it is shown that the eectiveness of TDMA is only applicable when the number of transmitting nodes is relatively stable over time [64]. This is applicable in periodic data gathering from regular member nodes to their cluster head. Further, direct transmission between non cluster head member nodes to their cluster head is more energy ecient for small to medium size clusters, due to their short distance. In addition, energy requirement for receiving is comparable to the transmission energy within a small to medium size cluster. Hence, TDMA allows energy saving of non cluster head nodes by switching o receiver circuits most of the time, eliminating idle listening. 4. Contention based MAC protocol during cluster setup: All nodes use contention-based MAC protocols during cluster setup phase. 5. There is no adjoining cluster interference: The research assumes that each cluster uses a dierent radio channel or FHSS for intra cluster communication, resulting zero 24
adjoining cluster interference. 6. Symmetric radio communication model: This implies, that the minimum energy required for node x to transmit to node y is the same as node y to node x. 7. Nodes have the capability of adjusting the transmission power: This implies, that all nodes use the exact minimum required power in communication using the output power programming capability of RF transceivers [49]. 8. The required transmitting power is calculated based on the received signal strength: Consider a situation where node x broadcasts a message with power PT xx and a node y receives it with power PRxy . If node y knows the PT xx (this information is included in the broadcast message) and minimum required receiver signal strength PRxmin to resolve the received signal, then node y will use PT xx PRxmin PRxy to communicate to x. This assumption is realistic, as nodes have the capability of adjusting the transmission power and measuring the received signal strength [49]. 9. Sensor nodes are uniform randomly distributed in a rectangular region: This assumption supports ad-hoc deployment of nodes (e.g. thrown from an aircraft to the area of interest). The assumption that all nodes are uniform randomly distributed implies that the node distribution is 2D Poisson point process, with intensity = N/A, where N is the total number of nodes, and A is the distributed area [65]. 10. Sensor nodes can aggregate or fuse multiple data packets to one packet: Sensor nodes in close proximity have highly correlated data. Sensor nodes can aggregate or fuse multiple data packets to one packet. This implies that in network data aggregation is possible at cluster head nodes. Most of the other wireless sensor network clustering algorithms of similar class (e.g. LEACH, HEED, ANTCLUST etc) has considered innite data compressibility at the cluster head node, with the assumption of perfect data correlation. This is acceptable for a scenario when identifying the maximum, minimum or average value of a given type of sensor measurement. On the other hand, [48] has proposed a more realistic data correlation model named Exponential Data Correlation, in which the aggregated data packet of two nodes apart r distance is given by (1 + ) , where is the length of data packet from each node, and = 1 er
in which > 0. Note that, = 0 is identical to the perfect data correlation. 25
11. Global re-clustering is more favorable than local cluster head role delegation: Global re-clustering is referred to as the change of cluster boundaries when the cluster head role is rotated (e.g. LEACH, HEED, ANTCLUST etc). Where as, in local cluster head role delegation, there is no change of cluster boundaries or members, but only the cluster head role is delegate to a dierent member of the same cluster (e.g. EDAC). Energy overhead in global re-clustering is higher than local cluster head role delegation. Global re-clustering produces well distributed clusters, where each cluster head locate close to the geometric centre of the cluster area. On the other hand, in local cluster role delegation, cluster head location is skewed most of the time. Further, it is shown in Appendix A.2 that a cluster head should be placed at the geometric center of the cluster area to minimize the total energy consumption of the cluster. In other words, when the cluster head is skewed, relatively more energy has to be spent. The number of cluster changes is negligible when compared to the number of periodic data gatherings. Hence, total impact on the energy dissipation when cluster head being skewed is more signicant compared to the energy overhead of re-clustering, instead of cluster head role delegation within the cluster. This is analytically proven in Appendix A.3. In this background, the research uses global re-clustering to rotate the cluster head role. It should be noted that, this research has relaxed the following two assumptions used in most of the existing literature, to gain additional advantages in applying the proposed algorithm to more general systems. 1. Homogeneous energy of nodes: The proposed algorithm should perform equally well in both homogeneous energy networks as well as in heterogeneous energy networks. This allows the algorithm to be used in an application, where a periodic data gathering or event based data gathering or hybrid of both, are used. Due to relaxation of this assumption, the algorithm can be applied to an existing network in which, initial residual energy diers among nodes. Furthermore, relaxation of this assumption will allow the network to replace new nodes for any expired nodes or addition of further new nodes, without altering the sensor network model. 2. Location awareness of nodes: Location awareness can be achieved using either GPS system or suitable localization technique. Addition of a GPS system to each and every node increases the cost of hardware of the system. On the other hand, utilization of a localization technique requires considerable amount of extra energy and added 26
complexity to the system [66]. Hence, relaxation of this assumption saves the cost, complexity, and extra energy requirement.
2.4.2
Energy Consumption Model
ET x ( , d) -bit packet
Tx Electronics Tx Amplier
amp
ERx ( , d) d
Rx Electronics
-bit packet
Eelec
dn
Eelec
Figure 2.4: Radio energy dissipation model
This research follows the same energy consumption model proposed by previous cluster based sensor network algorithms [19]-[35]. A simple model for the radio hardware energy dissipation shown in Figure 2.4 is used. The transmitter dissipates ET xelec ( ) energy to run the radio electronics, ET xamp ( , d) energy at the transmission amplier stage, and the receiver dissipates ERxelec ( ) energy to run the radio electronics, where is the bit length
and d is the transmission distance. A sensor node expends ET x ( , d) or ERx ( ) energy in transmitting or receiving a bit message to or from distance d respectively. These can be
computed using equations (2.1) and (2.2).
ET x ( , d) = ET xelec ( ) + ET xamp ( , d) = Eelec + ERx ( ) = ERxelec ( ) = Eelec where

amp
amp
dn
(2.1) (2.2)
and n corresponds to radio propagation path loss constant and exponent re-
spectively. In the study of wireless communications, path loss is represented by the path loss exponent n. It is normally in the range of 2 to 4 (where 2 is for propagation in free space, 4 is for relatively lossy environments with multipath fading).The path loss exponent n can reach values in the range of 4 to 6 in some environments such as buildings, stadiums, and other indoor environments. On the other hand, a tunnel may act as a waveguide, resulting in a path loss exponent less than 2. Based on these observations, most of the existing literature have used free space (FS) model where n = 2, and multi-path fading (MF) model where 27
n = 4, for simulation work. In the free space model ET xamp ( , d) =

amp
d2
The model given in (2.1) has been simplied using the following assumptions, to obtain a simplied multi path fading model. n = 4, and n = 2, where d0 = and
ampf s ampf s ampmp amp amp
ampmp
d d0
ampf s
d < d0
and
ampmp
correspond to the radio propagation attenuation constant corre-
sponding to the two scenarios. Further, a cluster head node consumes energy EDA (nJ/bit/message) in aggregating multiple sensor data into one. Based on this model, a normal node consumes energy only in transmitting to its cluster head in the data collection phase. However, a cluster head consumes energy in receiving data from its members, aggregation of received data, and transmission of aggregated data to the base station. Energy consumed in the data collection phase can be considered as useful. However, during cluster setup phase, all nodes have to spend energy on both transmitter and the receiver circuits, which is considered as an overhead in topology management.
2.4.3
Lifetime of the Sensor Network
The denition of the lifetime of a wireless sensor network depends on the application where the sensors are deployed. There are three commonly used denitions in the literature [22],[27]. First Node Dies (FND) : This denition is appropriate in situations where death of a single node deteriorates the quality of the network. E.g. Intrusion Detection systems. Percentage of Nodes Alive (PNA) : Time until a certain percentage of nodes are still alive. This denition is more appropriate for most of the applications with a requirement for a certain percentage of nodes alive for the network to provide credible information. Here, it is assumed that, some of the sensors are producing correlated
28
data, so that a certain amount of redundancies are built into the network. For example, measuring of environmental parameters in hard to reach places. The Half of the Nodes Alive (HNA) metric is a special case of this [22]. Last Node Dies (LND) : Though this parameter can be considered as a way to measure the lifetime of a sensor network, its practical applicability is very limited. The reason is the value of wireless sensor network is not based on the information content of a single node but as a group.
Unacceptable Acceptable Number of Live Sensor Nodes Ideal
Rounds
Figure 2.5: Number of live sensor nodes at the end of each round The goal of any good self organizing wireless sensor network protocol is to increase the lifetime of all sensors in the network. That is, the self organizing and communication algorithm should achieve both energy balance and energy eciency [42]. The ideal situation can be denoted when all sensors die at the same time as shown in Figure 2.5. Thereafter a new set of sensors can be deployed without replacing some of them. In general, adhoc wireless sensor networks are deployed in areas where the individual nodes are hard to reach after deployment. As indicated earlier, selective sensor replacement is not practical. Typically aerial dumping of sensor nodes in the interested area sets up such a sensor network. Hence, in this research PNA and FND metrics are used to measure the performance of the wireless sensor network. In the case of PNA, 95% of nodes alive is considered where not specically mentioned in the rest of the thesis. This value is assumed considering the quality of the information gathered and the correlation between the data gathered by nodes in a typical wireless sensor network application. Hence, it can be reiterated that the ultimate goal of this research is to shift the knee point of the graph to right while maintaining a right angle at the knee point. 29
CHAPTER 3
Proposed Energy Balanced Distributed Clustering Algorithm

This chapter presents the salient features of the proposed distributed clustering algorithm. It addresses the drawbacks identied in the existing equivalent class of algorithms. The name Energy Driven Cluster-Head Rotation (EDCR) algorithm [67]-[68] for wireless sensor networks coined for this. Moreover, this chapter focuses on the three areas of EDCR algorithm, namely, cluster head selection, cluster boundary determination, and cluster head role rotation. The key criterion inuencing the decision in all of these areas is the residual energy.
3.1
Objectives of the EDCR Algorithm
The main objectives of the EDCR algorithm is to overcome the drawbacks identied in existing distributed clustering algorithms for wireless sensor networks, and prolong the network life time. According to existing literature, EDCR algorithm is expected to meet the following performance objectives. 1. Cluster head will be the node with highest residual energy in its cluster: This criterion will facilitate the energy demanding cluster head role to be vested to the most suitable node, prolonging the life time of entire cluster. 2. A node will join its closest cluster head which has the most residual energy, using local information: This criterion for joining a cluster will reduce the communication energy cost of a member node and its cluster head. Further, the selection of the most residual energy cluster head reduces the burden of energy expenditure on less energy available cluster heads. This will prolong the life time of these weaker cluster head
30
nodes. Ultimately, resulting in member nodes as well as a cluster heads minimizing their energy expenditure. 3. When an existing cluster head is unable to carry out its duties, it will relinquish its role, and will initiate a role rotation phase: This rotation of the role of the cluster head allows a cluster head node to continue as an ordinary node even after it forgoes its role of cluster head. This, in turn, allows all the nodes to function a longer period of time and serve together. 4. A new node can be asynchronously added to the system, without disturbing the current system organization: Ad-hoc replacement of nodes for those that have died, will prolong an existing sensor network by maintaining the reliability of information gathered. 5. Cluster heads should be well distributed: This will makes certain that no two cluster heads are selected in each others neighborhood, thereby properly balance the work load among cluster heads. This will result in prolonged life time of the sensor network. 6. Variation of the number of actual clusters from the expected value should be minimum: This makes certain that the proposed distributed clustering algorithm would t any ad-hoc deployed wireless sensor network application. 7. Overhead in cluster setup phase should be less: Due to less communication and coordination energy overhead required for cluster setup and maintenance, eciency of the proposed energy balancing algorithm would increase. This would, in turn, increase the lifetime of sensor network. 8. Equal performance in both homogeneous and heterogeneous energy conditions: This allows the algorithm to perform equally in a newly deployed network where all nodes are assumed to have equal energy (homogeneous) and in a network with each node having a dierent amount of energy (heterogeneous). 9. Attainment of sensor network lifetime as close as possible to the ideal situation (as shown in Figure 2.5): This proposed algorithm will increase the life time of all nodes as much as possible, and make them all die simultaneously. This will result in redeployment of a brand new set of nodes. In other words, this will realize an energy ecient algorithm with perfect energy balancing among all nodes.
31
3.2
Overview of the Algorithm
Any distributed clustering algorithms for wireless sensor networks should provide eective solutions to the following questions. 1. How to identify the cluster head candidacy? 2. How to select the best cluster head for a given non cluster head node? 3. How to transmit periodically gathered data from member nodes to base station? 4. When to re-cluster the network? Indeed, the solutions to the above questions are constrained by limited energy capacity of each node. Proper usage of this limited energy capacity ultimately decides the life time of the entire sensor network. How the proposed EDCR algorithm answers each of the above questions, constrained by limited energy capacity of nodes, is explained respectively in the following subsections.
3.2.1
Cluster Head Candidacy
Proposed EDCR algorithm identies cluster head nodes using the Dutch auction principle (also known as descending price auction) [48]. Dutch auction principle makes certain that the most suitable node (i.e. the node with the highest residual energy in a given neighborhood), is selected as the cluster head without having multiple iterations (many bids) resulting a minimum energy overhead. This is achieved as follows. All sensor nodes initially consider themselves as potential candidates to be a cluster head. This algorithm makes certain that sensor nodes with higher residual energy have a better chance of advertising their candidacy earlier than other sensor nodes within a neighborhood of R. When another node receives this advertisement, it will abandon its quest to become a cluster head. This will ensure that the node with the highest residual energy always ends up being the cluster head within its neighborhood R. How this can be achieved is elucidated below. It is assumed that the cluster head advertisement phase is limited to a time interval of T time units. As such, any sensor node i would announce its candidacy for cluster head within a radius of R at a time instance of Ti . This is given by equation (3.1) Ti = T (1 Pi ) + ki , (3.1)
where ki is a random time unit introduced to reduce the possibility of collisions among sensor node advertisements with identical Pi , in the same neighborhood. Pi [0, 1] represents the 32
relative residual energy level of a node i with respect to other nodes in its neighborhood. In other words, the node i with the highest residual energy would be assigned with the highest value of Pi in a given neighborhood R. Hence, according to equation (3.1), node with the highest residual energy in a neighborhood will have the lowest Ti , resulting in it being chosen as the cluster head. However, it should be noted that these initial conditions that apply to equation (3.1) are dierent for homogeneous and heterogeneous energy sensor networks. Homogeneous energy sensor network For homogeneous energy wireless sensor networks, Pi = Pj = 1, i = j at the initial round as all sensors are considered to be equipped with batteries having equal residual energy. Then, equation (3.1) would result in Ti = ki . For all subsequent rounds Pi = Pj 1, i = j . There the sensor node, with the smallest Ti found using equation (3.1), will broadcast its cluster head candidacy. Heterogeneous energy sensor network For heterogeneous energy wireless sensor networks, Pi = Pj 1, i = j at the initial round as same as subsequent rounds. This is a direct result of either the wireless sensor network having dissimilar residual energies at deployment or the algorithm being applied to an already existing wireless sensor network.
Calculation of Pi for dierent rounds, is given in Section 3.2.4 paragraph 3. The neighborhood R is computed assuming that the wireless sensor network consists of E [k ] number of clusters. Technique for nding R for a given E [k ] number of clusters is given in Section 4.2. Set of sensor nodes within a neighborhood of radius from any node j is denoted by Nj . Further, set H is dened as, H = {i| set of all nodes i where node i is a CH} Observation : For any node i with j NiR , when Ti < Tj = E t resi > E t resj . E t resi and E t resj are the residual energies of nodes i and j at this moment.
3.2.2
Cluster Head Selection
The proposed EDCR algorithm select the best cluster head for a given non cluster head node using equation (3.2). CHj is the selected best cluster head for the given j non cluster 33
head node. CHj = where Di,j = E t resi PRxi,j . PT xi (3.3) i

R iHNj
max Di,j
(3.2)
Here, PRxi,j and PT xi represent the received signal power from node i to node j and the transmitted power of the advertisement message for node i respectively. The cluster head advertisement message will contain both E t resi and PT xi which will be used in equation (3.2). Furthermore, Di,j will achieve the following: 1. E t resi will allow to select a cluster head node with a higher residual energy over other lower residual energy cluster head nodes. For example, those cluster head nodes PRxi which are at an equal distance from j , will have identical values for . Hence, PT xi the dominating factor would be E t resi . This will facilitate the selection of the higher energy node which would bear the burden of processing an additional node. In turn, the weaker cluster head nodes life time will be prolonged. 2. PRxi,j will allow to select the closet cluster head node which will help to reduce the PT x i energy consumption of node j . For example, when cluster head nodes have equal E t resi , but are placed at an unequal distances from j , j will select the closest cluster head node. This will prolong the lifetime of sensor node j since it will be using lesser power PT xj to reach its cluster head in all subsequent communications. Further, it should be noted that Di,j can be used with any communication model as PRxi,j PT xi . di,j n
The combination of the above facts will ensure that the life time of the entire wireless sensor network is prolonged eectively. Moreover, the cluster head node i calculates a dynamic threshold i based on the current residual energy condition of the node at the time t = using following formula.
t i = c. Eresi
t=
Here, the time t = is the moment it broadcasts its cluster head candidacy and c [0, 1] is a predetermined constant. The use of such a threshold to generate an event driven cluster head rotation will be explained in Section 3.2.4 and a technique to calculate a suitable c for a given system requirement is explained in Section 5.2.
34
Subsequently, a cluster head j calculates its TDMA schedule for the nodes which joined its cluster and broadcast this schedule among them. Apart from the slots allocated for each member node in its cluster, the TDMA schedule will have a time slot reserved for the cluster head to send any messages to its members if any. This slot will also be used to send control information if any. In a normal data gathering round this slot will not carry any specic control messages, and thus will not generate overheads that will expend energy. However, the cluster head will use this time slot to update its members at the time of a cluster head rotation. All the member nodes will keep awake during this time slot to identify any control messages from the cluster head. Note : A given cluster, headed by node i is dened as a set of nodes, including itself, by Mi ( (NiR i)), which is denoted as
Mi = j | set of all nodes j such that Di,j > Dk,j where j NiR and k H NjR
; for any i H
3.2.3
Data Transmission
This subsection explains how cluster heads, produced by proposed EDCR algorithm, periodically gather data from their member nodes and upload to the base station. Here, non cluster head nodes j (Mi \ i) send their data within the allotted time slot, according to the TDMA schedule, to their cluster head i. This cluster head uses a data fusion algorithm to merge the data it received from its cluster Mi before sending those data to the base station. N ote : During this period, algorithm refrains from exchanging unnecessary information such as updates of residual energy to neighbors and update of state information to base station related to cluster management. These type of communication occur only at the time of cluster head rotation which is completely event driven in comparison to existing algorithms. Further, number of such events are signicantly low compared to the number of data gathering rounds. Therefore, EDCR algorithm has less overhead.
3.2.4
Cluster Head Rotation
In deciding when to re-cluster the network, the proposed EDCR algorithm considers the residual energy of cluster heads. When a cluster head node i nds its residual energy falling below the threshold value i , it triggers a new cluster head candidacy event by informing the base station that it is unable to perform its duties as a cluster head any more. The base 35
station, then, will inform this to all other cluster heads, thereby initiating a cluster head rotation phase (Note : Most of the previous energy aware distributed clustering algorithms such as LEACH, HEED, SEP and ANTCLUST have a predetermined time point to initiate a cluster head rotation phase.). Subsequently, all cluster heads use their immediate next chance in the TDMA slot to communicate this fact to their members, and further request nodes to send their residual energy along with the data in their allotted slot. A cluster head i computes the maximum residual energy component of its cluster Mi using
t Eresi ,max = max Eres . j j Mi
It will then broadcast this information to all neighboring cluster head nodes j H Ni2R+ .
Here, is a small positive number which represents a degree of uncertainty when computing the distance to neighbor cluster heads. Further, 2R + would be the maximum expected
distance from one cluster head to its closest neighbor cluster head with a high degree of condence1 as shown in Figure 3.1. Based on this, cluster head i can get access to the maximum residual energy information of its second degree neighborhood SN i as given by;
SN i = j j kHN 2R+ Mk Mi
i
This SN i can extend up to 3R + in any direction from the cluster head i. Then the cluster head i updates its member base with the highest available residual energy level of its SN i in the immediate next TDMA slot and triggers a cluster formation phase. Use of SN i information to derive the relative energy position Pi of a node i is more meaningful, since it will dispel any ambiguity in nodes at a border of two clusters. In addition, it guarantees that a given node will know its residual energy level with respect to its immediate neighborhood or even further. This relative residual energy level is computed using Pi = where Eresi ,sup = max
j HNi2R+ t Eres i , Eresi ,sup
(3.4)
max
Eresj ,max , Eresi ,max
(3.5)
Above described cluster head rotation process is graphically shown in Figure 3.2. The next step would be to initiate a cluster head candidacy phase as explained in Section 3.2.1.
1
Determination of
for a given system setup is presented in Section 5.3.
36
3R + R R
2R
Figure 3.1: Second degree neighborhood
CH rotation command from BS Inform BS
CH clculate Eresi ,max and bcast to 2nd degree neighborhood Calculate Eresi ,sup
TDMA n
TDMA n+1
TDMA n+2
Time
CH commands members to update Eres Members reply in allotted time slot with data
Update members Eresi ,sup & order members to wakeup and Sync with BS to start a new CH candidacy pahase
t Figure 3.2: Re-clustering sequence of cluster head i when Eres i i
37
Note : It is worth highlighting that the number of occasions the cluster head role changes are extremely low compared to the number of routine data gathering rounds. Hence, the total energy overhead in cluster role rotation is also extremely low.
3.3
Algorithm Pseudo Code
Setup() if Initial round then Compute Pi using immediate neighbor information. end if Cluster Head Candidacy() Compute Ti from equation (3.1) All nodes are potential Cluster Heads while t < T do if Still a potential Cluster Head & based on Ti its your turn then Broadcast Candidacy to nodes in NiR Become a Cluster Head end if if Still a potential Cluster Head & Hear Message from j with i NjR then Abandon quest to be Cluster Head end if if Abandon quest to be Cluster Head then Identify all reachable Cluster Heads based on received Cluster Head candidacy messages end if end while Cluster Head Selection and join() if i H then identify the most cost eective Cluster Head Send a join request message to it else if i H then Collect all the join requests Prepare the TDMA schedule and Broadcast to members end if Cluster Head Rotation() 38
t if i H and Eres < i then i
Request Base Station for a Cluster Head change end if if BS request a Cluster Head Change then Find the Eresi ,sup from (3.5) Initiate a Cluster Head selection phase end if
The possible internal state change of a sensor node due to application of EDCR algorithm is given in the Figure 3.3.
After TDMA Schedule received
Routine Data gathering as non CH

t<T
When CH Rotation Request Received
Join a Cluster
t == T t == Ti
CH
t == T
CH Candidate Non CH
Overheard CH Announcement
After Informing Re-clustering Msg. to Existing Members
Member Identication Routine Data gathering as CH
t<T
Maximum Residual Energy Search

Re-clustering Request from BS
After TDMA Schedule Published
Eresi > i
Figure 3.3: State change of a sensor node
39
CHAPTER 4
Performance Analysis of the EDCR Algorithm

A new energy balancing distributed clustering algorithm for wireless sensor networks named EDCR was introduced in the previous chapter. In what follows, an analysis of accuracy, complexity, and behavior of this EDCR algorithm [68]-[69] is presented. At the same time, an analysis of EDCR algorithm cluster distribution [70] is given. Through these analyses, it is shown that the EDCR algorithm has met the desired objectives such as low complexity, fully distributed nature, less energy overhead, and well distributed cluster heads.
4.1
Accuracy and Complexity
Observation 1. The EDCR algorithm is completely distributed. A node i can elect to be a cluster head based on locally calculated candidacy announcement time Ti , or else it can join a cluster within its neighborhood based on the cluster head j ( H NiR ) announcement message it overheard. Each node i calculates Ti based on the information it collected from its previous cluster head- s second degree neighborhood SN .
Observation 2. In the EDCR algorithm, a new cluster head selection phase is initiated by the base station at a given instant. This cluster head selection phase is terminated after a xed amount of time (Cluster head candidacy announcement period T + additional time allowed to complete joining a cluster + time taken for the cluster head to send the TDMA schedule ), irrespective of the number of nodes N . In other words time complexity of algorithm is O(1).
40
Observation 3. The EDCR algorithm eectively balances the energy level of all nodes in a given local neighborhood. This is achieved by selecting the highest residual energy node of any neighborhood as the cluster head, and this cluster heads role rotation is determined by the residual energy level. Energy based cluster head selection and role rotation make all nodes work together and die together in any neighborhood. Further, energy based cluster formation decision helps to balance the local energy of heterogeneous energy node sensor networks.
Lemma 1 At the end of the cluster head candidacy phase, a node will either become a cluster head or will identify a cluster in which it can act as an ordinary member node. Proof. At the beginning of the cluster head candidacy phase, all nodes mark themselves as potential cluster heads. Yet, node i will become a member of cluster, headed by node j , if Ti > Tj where j NiR . On the other hand, if Ti < minj N R Tj , then node i becomes a
i
cluster head. Further, in Ti = T and
NiR
= {} too, node i becomes a cluster head. Based
on this, by the time T , all nodes will either be cluster heads or will be discovered by at least one cluster head. Lemma 2 The probability that two nodes within each others broadcasting range R, becoming cluster heads is very small. i.e. Cluster heads are well distributed. Proof. The only possibility that this can happen is when there are two (or more) undiscovered neighbor nodes i and j (where j NiR i NjR ) having Pi = Pj . As a result, the deterministic component of Ti and Tj are the same. However, based on ki and kj , the node which rst announce cluster head candidacy becomes a cluster head and the other node will abandon its candidacy quest. If kx = ( x ) / , where x [1, ] is a random integer with a uniform PDF given by px = (1/ ), and is an appropriate xed time duration. Then, the two nodes i and j , making their cluster head announcements at the same time has a probability of (1/ 2 ). Similarly, n such identical nodes making announcements at once is (1/ n ). Typically, it is possible to assume that a sensor node has the ability to generate 1000 random discrete numbers. Then, the probability of two or more nodes announcing at the same time is less than .0001%. Lemma 3 The total overhead in exchanging control messages in the wireless sensor network has a complexity of O(N ).
41
Proof. EDCR algorithm sends small xed length control messages during each cluster set up period, without iterations as found in HEED. Every cluster head has to send 5 dierent control messages, one per: 1. Cluster head candidacy announcement 2. TDMA schedule announcement 3. Residual energy request from its members 4. Announcement of maximum energy level among its cluster members to neighboring cluster heads 5. Update of its members with the maximum energy level within its second degree neighborhood Further, only one among all cluster heads will send a cluster head rotation request message. All non-cluster head nodes will send cluster join request messages. It is also important to note that answer to residual energy request message is carried out using existing data transmission packet. Hence, it is ignored in the computation. Total Overhead Messages = 5kexp + 1 + (N kexp ) where, kexp is the expected number of cluster heads. Typically kexp << N . Thus, the total message overhead is O(N ). In LEACH, the cluster heads transmit 2 control messages and non-cluster head nodes send only one message. Total Overhead Messages in LEACH = 2N P + N (1 P ), where P is the percentage of cluster heads [46]. However, in LEACH, the cluster head announcement messages must be broadcasted to cover the entire wireless sensor network, whereas in EDCR, the messages are limited to a radius of R and a radius of 2R + . On the other hand, a complex algorithm like HEED has a total control message overhead of Niter N as given in [27]. Typically, a high energy node will iterate up to Niter = 6 rounds and low energy node may go beyond Niter = 15 rounds. Considering that kexp << N in EDCR and P < 0.1 in LEACH, it is possible to approximate EDCR Total Message Overhead per round N LEACH Total Message Overhead per round N HEED Total Message Overhead per round Niter N 42
As previously discussed in Section 1.3, complex weight based algorithms can achieve a sharp edge in the lifetime curve compared to pure randomized algorithms. Yet, in many of the weight based algorithms, the control message overhead is high. This will adversely aect the total lifetime of the system. The goal of most researchers such as Wang et. al. [46] have been to derive a good weight based dynamic and distributed clustering algorithm which has sharp edge lifetime curve with low control message overhead similar to a dynamic distributed and random (DDR) algorithm. The EDCR algorithm has archived this goal. The analysis done in this section has proven that the EDCR algorithm has achieved the expected objectives. The simulation results presented in Chapter 7 conrms the above analysis.
4.2
Cluster Distribution
In this section, cluster distribution of the proposed EDCR algorithm is analysed. Knowledge of the cluster distribution is important in deriving the design parameters of the algorithm in priori. The rst of these is the cluster density or the desired number of clusters on the sensor bed during operations. For example, it is a common requirement of most wireless sensor network deployment strategies to form on average E [k ] number of clusters each containing on average E [n] number of nodes within the given deployment region taking into consideration the redundancy required for reliable operation. The second parameter of interest is the knowledge of the average distance between neighboring cluster heads prior to deployment. This is required when the algorithm uses multi hopping over a cluster head overlay in sending the aggregated cluster data to the base station.
4.2.1
Preliminaries
A foundation for the analysis in nding cluster distribution of the proposed EDCR algorithm is laid out below. It is assumed that, there are N number of uniform randomly distributed nodes in a given area A, following a Poisson point process distribution with intensity , where = N/A [65]. It is also assumed that a cluster is well populated, i.e. a cluster consists of a large number of less reliable low cost sensors collaboratively working to achieve reliable results. Hence, >> 1, where is a random variable denoting the cluster area and < R2 . As a result, R2 >> 1. Following salient points of the EDCR algorithm are highlighted for this analysis. 43 (4.1)
a) EDCR algorithm does not allow two cluster heads to be within a distance R. Further, it ensures all the nodes are either discovered by a cluster head (i.e. there is a cluster head within a distance R of a regular node) or itself is a cluster head. b) The algorithm uses a parameter Ti , which represents the inverse of relative energy level Pi of a given node i in its neighborhood. In other words, higher the relative node energy, lower is the Ti of a given node i. Node i with lowest Ti would be elected as the cluster head in that neighborhood. c) Ti is purely random during the initial deployment. It follows that, the selected cluster heads of EDCR algorithm represent a dependent thinning point process on the original 2D Poisson point process. Let S represents the set of all deployed nodes. Here, S is a nite measure subset of R2 with |S| = N . The clustering process yields a random set H( S ) of secondary points, which are called cluster heads with the property that dist(hi , hj ) > R where hi , hj H, i = j and dist(, ) is the distance between two nodes. Note that S \ H are the non cluster head member nodes. For any node mk S \ H, it has dist(mk , hi ) < R and Tmk > Thi at least for one cluster head node hi H. It is noted that, mk is a member of the cluster with cluster head hi when dist(mk , hi ) < dist(mk , hj ) < R and both hi and hj have same residual energy. According to [71], above described dependant thinning point process follows a Mat` ern Type III process when Ti is a pure random value. Hence, it can be concluded that the cluster head distribution of EDCR algorithm at the beginning would resemble to Mat` ern Type III point process since all nodes are having same residual energy. Further, Bertil Mat` ern has shown in [72] that the point distribution of Mat` ern Type III dependant thinning process is mathematically intractable. The research highlights this fact to indicates, that for such a process, the point distribution cannot be found. As a result, it is not possible to use the conventional method of using cluster head distribution to derive the cluster head density. Thus, an indirect method, which uses the cluster area distribution to derive the cluster head density, is applied.
4.2.2
Probability Density Function of Cluster Area,
Based on the analysis of the EDCR algorithm, it is observed that the probability of depends on the following two scenarios viz. 1. For a given cluster area, there are no uncovered nodes in its cluster neighborhood. 2. The chance that having no such uncovered nodes. 44
Let PB be the probability that no uncovered nodes exist in a given cluster neighborhood. Then the conditional probability PA|B denotes the cluster area given no uncovered nodes exist in a given cluster neighborhood. Based on these facts, the probability PA.B of a resultant cluster area when no uncovered nodes exists, is presented below. PA.B (1 2 ) = PA|B (1 2 ) PB (1 2 ) , where 0 1 < 2 R2 (4.2)
Figure 4.1: Smallest possible cluster size
3R 2 2
In order to explain above terms, Figure 4.1, Figure 4.2 and Figure 4.3 will be used. According to the algorithm, smallest possible cluster area size would result whenever a given cluster heads neighboring cluster heads sit on the perimeter of its cluster head broadcasting coverage disc with radius R, since no two cluster heads could be selected within each others cluster head broadcasting range R. This situation is shown in the Figure 4.1. Hence, 2 3R = 0. (4.3) PA| B 0 < < 2 In other words, Figure 4.1 shows the possible highest cluster head density (number of cluster heads in a given unit area). According to the algorithm, cluster area sizes are between
3R2 2
smallest of
to largest of R2 provided there are no uncovered nodes in the cluster
neighborhood. Therefore, 0 < PA|B (3 4 ) 1 ; where 45 3R2 3 < 4 R2 . 2 (4.4)
Figure 4.2: Largest possible closed packed cluster size
3 3R2 2
Figure 4.3: Cluster area more than
3 3R2 2
create uncovered region shaded in gray
46
Further, it can be stated that when close pack clusters (smallest as shown in Figure 4.1 and largest as shown in Figure 4.2) exist, there cannot be any uncovered areas. In other words, when cluster area >
3 3R2 , 2
there can be uncovered nodes in its neighborhood since there
can be uncovered neighboring regions as shown in Figure 4.3. PB () which represents the probability that there are no uncovered nodes in a given cluster (with area ) neighborhood can be expressed by PB () = P (n = 0|Au ) = eAu (4.5)
where, Au is any uncovered area formed by the cluster setup as given in Figure 4.3. It can be shown that, the neighboring clusters are closed pack when the cluster area,
3 3R2 . 2
In other words, there are no uncovered area, resulting Au = 0. As a result, there would not be any uncovered nodes. PB 3 3R2 2 =1 (4.6)
Figure 4.4: Proof of PB ( >
3 3R2 ) 2
47
According to equation (4.5), PB () is an exponential decaying function when >
3 3R2 . 2
Now, Figure 4.4 will be considered. This is a special case of Figure 4.2 and Figure 4.3 where nodes 0 and 6 are placed 2R distance apart. According to Figure 4.4, there is a chance for a node to be in the uncovered area Au shaded in gray. The cluster area of Figure 4.4 can be expressed as follows. 3 3R2 = + 2 3 6 4 3 3R 2 R = (1 + .0349) 2
2
This is only 3.49% bigger than the size of the cluster area shown in Figure 4.2. The uncovered area Au of Figure 4.4 (as shaded in gray) can be expressed as, Au = 2 (p,q,r + p,q,c0 + p,r,c1 + q,r,c6 Sp,q,c0 Sp,r,c1 Sq,r,c6 ) (4.7)
where, in general x,y,z represents an area of a triangle {x, y, z } and Sx,y,z represents an area of a sector {x, y, z }. Since p = (0.5R, 0.8660R),q = (0, R),r = (0.5446R, 1.1613R), c0 = (0, 0), c1 = (1.5R, 0.8660R) and c6 = (0, 2R), it can be derived Au = 0.094R2 . R2 >> 1 is given in equation (4.1). Therefore, when a wireless sensor network with 100 nodes in a given node neighborhood is considered, i.e. R2 = 100, which would intern result in PB = P (n = 0|Au ) = 0.0502. On the other hand, when the neighborhood contain 200 nodes this will be further reduced to PB = P (n = 0|Au ) = 0.0025. Hence, 3 3R 2 PB > 0 ; when R2 >> 1 2 Therefore, PB can be approximated to, 3 3R2 PB =1 2 3 3R 2 > 2
(4.8)
and PB
=0
(4.9)
provided R2 >> 1. Hence, once combining the equations (4.2), (4.3), (4.4) and (4.9), the following can be derived. PA.B This implies that, PA.B 3R2 3 3R 2 2 2 = 1. (4.11) 3 3R 2 3R2 >> 2 2 =0 (4.10)
Further, the resultant cluster areas of EDCR algorithm should have an equal chance to
be between the interval [ Hence,
3R2 3 3R2 , ] 2 2
resulting its PDF pA.B () would be a uniform one.

3R2 2 3 3R2 2
pA.B () =
1 3R2
; ; 48
(4.12)
otherwise
provided that R2 >> 1. This result will be used to derive the expected cluster density in what follows.
4.2.3
Derivation of Expected Cluster Density
The expected cluster density (or cluster head density as each cluster is served by one and only one cluster head) of the proposed EDCR algorithm is derived using the equation (4.12). y , below, is dened as the probability that a randomly chosen node is a cluster head, y= Number of cluster heads in a given area Total number of nodes in the same given area 1 = Number of nodes in a random cluster 1 =
(4.13)
Therefore, the PDF of y (pY (y )) can be derived using equations (4.12) and (4.13) as, 1 2 ; y 32 3y 2 R2 3 3R2 R2 (4.14) pY (y ) = 0 ; otherwise According to equation (4.13), y can be further represented by, y= k , N
where, k is the random total number of cluster heads at a given instant and N the total number of nodes. Hence E [y ], the expected probability that a given node is a cluster head can be denoted as, E [y ] = E [k/N ] = E [k ]/N = c /, where, c is the cluster head density. c = E [y ]
(4.15)
(4.16)
E [y ] =
y pY (y ) dy
2 3R2 2 3 3R2
= = =
1 dy 3y 2 R2
3 ln 3
1 (R2 ) (4.17)
1 0.5018 (R2 ) 49
Therefore, according to (4.17) it is possible to expect a 0.5018 fraction of nodes belonging to a given cluster heads broadcasting range R neighborhood to join its cluster. Further, using equations (4.16) and (4.17), c can be derived as, c =
3 ln 3
1 ln 3 = = 2 0.5018R2 3R R2
(4.18)
Thus, it can be concluded that the expected cluster head density, c is independent of node density provided R2 >> 1.
Observation : This answer is very much in line with the empirical formula proposed by Bettstetter in [73]1 where c =
1+/2
and = R2 . When R2 >> 1 the empirical
formula proposed by Bettstetter reduced to c = 1 = . 0.5 0.5R2
Up to this point, inuence of the nite wireless sensor network boundary is ignored. In what follows, eect of this (referred as border eect ) is analyzed. The cluster heads closest to the boundary does not have any neighboring cluster heads beyond the boundary. Hence, they become isolated and elect themselves as cluster heads and form clusters which are sparsely populated. In other words, nodes at the border have a higher isolation probability even though all the nodes are uniformly distributed within the sensor bed. As a result, cluster heads are more likely to be found at the border. This was indeed conrmed in [73]. Equations (4.15) and (4.17) can be used to derive the expected number of clusters E [k ] to be formed, assuming that above mentioned border eect is negligible for very large sensor beds. In other words, the reality that there can be more cluster heads close to the border compared to rest of the area is relaxed in equation (4.19). The signicance of the impact of this to E [k ] depends on the size of the sensor bed compared to cluster head candidacy broadcasting range, R. E [k ] = N E [y ] = N M (4.19)
3 ln 3
where, M = R2 is the expected number of nodes in any given cluster head broadcasting range R, without considering the border eect. In what follows, M is derived considering the border eect for frequently required sensor bed shapes. Hence, the research will consider a rectangular sensor bed with dimensions a b and a circular one with radius r each consists
Bettstetter used DMAC[74] distributed clustering algorithm for his work. Both DMAC and EDCR algorithms generate similar cluster head distribution (Mat` ern Type III) [75].
1
50
of N number of uniform randomly distributed nodes. Based on this, the expected number of clusters, E [k ] for these frequently required practical cases are derived.
4.2.4
Expected Number of Clusters, E [k ] of a Rectangular Deployment Area
The following section will consider the border eect on the expected number of clusters, E [k ] of a sensor bed with dimensions a b and having N nodes. First, M is derived for a rectangular sensor bed with dimensions a b having N nodes considering the border eect. In such a setup, the probability (P0 ) that two uniformly distributed nodes, each within cluster head candidacy broadcasting range R is given by the integral,
R
P0 =
0
fS (s)ds,
(4.20)
where, fS (s) is the PDF of the distance S between two nodes that are independent uniform randomly distributed in a rectangular area of size a b where a b > R [76] is, fS (s) = 4s a2 b2 ab 1 as bs + 2 2 2s ; for 0 s b. (4.21)
Thus, M , with N (>> 1) is given by, M = N P0 . Using equations (4.20)-(4.22), M= N R2 ab 1 4R R2 (a + b) + 3ab 2ab . (4.23) (4.22)
Further, when (4.23) is used with (4.19), the expected number of cluster heads E [k ] can be derived as, E [k ] = ab ln 3 . R2 4R 1 (a + b) + 3ab 2ab (4.24)
3R2
However, what is more important is to identify R which would give the desired E [k ]. This is the practical requirement. Hence, equation (4.24) can be rewritten as, 3 4 4 3(a + b) 3 2 ab ln 3 R R + 3R =0 2ab 3ab E [k ]
(4.25)
By solving of equation (4.25), R can be derived for a given wireless sensor network setup with expected number of clusters provided R2 >> 1.
51
4.2.5
Expected Number of Clusters, E [k ] of a Circular Deployment Area
This section will explain how E [k ] for a circular deployment region could be derived. The same approach taken for rectangular sensor bed in the previous section will be repeated. It is assumed that the sensor bed consists of uniform randomly deployed N number of nodes in the deployment region of r radius circle resulting = N/r2 . Again, as the rst step, M will be derived considering the border eect of a r radius circular deployment area where N number of nodes being deployed. Still, equations (4.22) and (4.20) is applicable with fS (s), the PDF of the distance S between two nodes that are independent uniform randomly distributed in a r radius circular area. In [77], this is given by, fS (s) = 4s r2 cos1 s s 2r 2r 1 s 2r
2
; for 0 s 2r.
(4.26)
Thus, E [k ] of a given circular area with radius r can be written as, 2 ln 3 E [k ] = 2 3D(R/r) where, R D(R/r) = 4 2r
2
(4.27)
cos
R 2r R 2r
R 3 2r
2
3 2
R 2r R . 2r
1 2
R +2 2r
+ sin1
(4.28)
Therefore, R for a given circular deployment area with radius r with an expected number of clusters, E [k ] can be determined by solving the reordered equation (4.27).
Note : E [k ] for the EDCR algorithm with given R was derived assuming that the Ti is a random variable. This is true, if the system is initially equipped with equal energy nodes. However, Ti would be a weightage, based on the residual energy level in all subsequent cluster formations. Further, according to the EDCR algorithm a node with the highest residual energy would be the cluster head in a given neighborhood. It is known that the node closest to the cluster head has to spend minimum energy, thus would be the highest residual energy node in its neighborhood at the beginning of each subsequent cluster head selection phase. Hence, the next cluster head would be the node closest to the previous cluster head. As a result, it can be expected that the number of clusters formed in subsequent rounds at re-clustering would be approximately the same as the rst round. The consequence of this would be the equation (4.25) being valid for all subsequent rounds as well.
52
Remark : Above presented analytical technique can be used to determine cluster head density of other dependant thinning distributed clustering algorithms such as DMAC [74], HEED [27], ANTCLUST [26] and MEDIC [48] whose cluster head distribution resembles to Mat` ern Type III point distribution. More discussions of this can be found in [75]. Thus far, analytical formulae were derived to nd out the expected cluster density and number of clusters for a circular and rectangular deployment. This information will be applied in deriving an approximated value for expected distance between neighboring cluster heads. This approximated value will be useful in calculating the energy budget when the algorithm uses multi hopping over a cluster head overlay in sending the aggregated cluster data to base station as described in Chapter 6.
4.2.6
Average Distance between Neighboring Cluster Heads
The average distance between neighboring cluster heads, which is denoted by DCH CH , is derived in this section. It should be noted that, the distance between two neighboring cluster heads is twice the distance to the common boundary from any cluster head. DCH CH can be approximated using an average size of a cluster Aav without taking the border eect into consideration. Shape of a typical cluster area produced by a distributed clustering algorithm is a Voronoi polygon, with cluster head as the nucleus [33]. Based on observations, it is found, that these clusters have six sides on average. Further, this is conrmed in [78]. Hence, the shape of a cluster is approximated to a hexagon with equal sides. Then, 2 2 3DCH CH 1 3R Aav = = = 2 c ln3 2R DCH CH = = 1.3493R (4.29) ln 3 Correctness of the proposed analytical framework in determining cluster distribution of the EDCR algorithm will be evaluated using Matlab simulation experiments in Section 7.4.
53
CHAPTER 5
Optimization of the Control Parameters for EDCR Algorithm

Operation of EDCR algorithm is mainly determined by three parameters namely: 1. Cluster head candidacy broadcasting radius, R 2. Cluster head rotation trigger function parameter, c 3. Second degree neighborhood determining parameter, It is important to identify the right values for the above three parameters for ecient and eective operation of the EDCR algorithm. Thus, this chapter presents suitable techniques for nding the optimum values of the above parameters in maximizing the entire sensor network lifetime.
5.1
Optimum Cluster Head Candidacy Broadcasting Range, Ropt
First, the eect of R on the lifetime of a wireless sensor network is identied. As already discussed in the previous chapter, the expected number of clusters, E [k ] is determined by the size of the cluster head candidacy broadcasting radius R. When R increases, the area of each cluster too would increase, resulting in lesser cluster density. As a result, the average distance that a node has to communicate to reach its cluster head increases. Therefore, most of the non-cluster head member nodes have to spend more energy to communicate to their respective cluster heads. Further, the energy requirement of cluster heads to handle their member nodes increase due to the increase in member population. In contrast, when R reduces, there would be a large number of cluster heads, all of which have to communicate with the distance base station, resulting in an increase of total energy dissipation. Hence, 54
selection of optimum R (denoted by Ropt ) is crucial for the prolong lifetime of the wireless sensor network. Data-centric analysis of energy consumption method is followed to derive the optimal cluster head candidacy broadcasting range, Ropt . This analysis considers a wireless sensor network with N number of identical sensor nodes, which are uniform, randomly distributed in a deployment region of area A, resulting in a node distribution of Poisson point process with an intensity of = N/A. Shape of a typical cluster area produced by a distributed clustering algorithm is a Voronoi polygon, with cluster head as the nucleus [33]. Based on authors observations, it is found out these clusters have six sides on average. Further, this is conrmed in [78]. However, considering the practical situation, it is entirely possible to approximate it to a circle with small error. Hence, this research will approximate an average cluster area to a circle with a radius Rc for the ease of computations. If there are E [k ] number of expected clusters in the deployment area A, Rc can be approximated as, Rc = A . E [k ] (5.1)
The total energy cost of transmitting one bit of data, gathered from each node to the base station is calculated next. JCH (i), below is dened as the amount of energy dissipated in transferring one bit of information originated from a cluster head node i. JCH (i) = EDA + JBST X (i) ; i H, (5.2)
where, EDA represents the data aggregation cost and JBST X (i) represents the data transmission cost, of one bit to base station from the cluster head i. JBST X (i) is given by equation (5.3). Eelec + Eelec +
2 ampf s di,BS 4 ampmp di,BS
JBST X (i) =
; ;
di,BS d0 otherwise
(5.3)
Similarly, JCM (j, i) is dened as the amount of energy dissipated in the system, to transfer one bit of information, originated from any cluster member node j , belonging to a cluster head node is cluster, to the base station. This can be given by, JCM (j, i) = JCM CH (j, i) + JCM CH BS (j, i) ; j (Mi \ i) where i H (5.4)
where, JCM CH (j, i) represents the energy cost of sending, receiving, and aggregating one bit from a member node j , to its cluster head i. Further, JCM CH BS (i, j ) denotes the energy cost of transferring the aggregated data received from that member node. JCM CH (j, i) 55
and JCM CH BS (i, j ) are given by equations (5.5) and (5.6) respectively. EDA + 2Eelec + ampf s d2 ; di,j d0 i,j JCM CH (j, i) = EDA + 2Eelec + ampmp d4 ; otherwise i,j
(5.5)
JCM CH BS (j, i) = (di,j )JBST X (i)
(5.6)
where, (di,j ) [0, 1] represents the compressibility of a data bit, due to the correlation. (di,j ) = 0 shows the perfect compressibility and (di,j ) = 1 shows no compressibility. In this analysis, exponential data correlation model is used. Therefore, (di,j ) can be given by, (di,j ) = 1 edi,j where, > 0. ). Note : The data compressibility of two adjoining sensor nodes can be given by (D is the average distance between two adjoining sensor nodes. This is given by Here, D equation (A.1) of Appendix A.1. Therefore, the compressibility of two adjoining nodes can be given by (1 e/(2
) ).
(5.7)
Thus, the total data gathering cost of one round denoted by Jtotal can be written as follows; Jtotal =
iH
JCH (i) +
j (Mi \i)
JCM (j, i)
(5.8)
Jtotal given in equation (5.8) represents an instantaneous value of a random node distribution. However, what is more important for this analysis is the expected value of Jtotal , total . Therefore, it is possible to derive J total using Theorem 1 of [57] derived denoted by J total , by Campbells Theorem 1 . It is noted that, N/E [k ] 1 N/E [k ] is used in deriving J as given by equation (5.9). total = E [k ](EDA + J BST X ) + N (J CM CH + BST X ) J J (5.9)
CM CH and J BST X , are given by equations (5.10), (5.11) and (5.12) respectively. where, , J = =
0 0
2 Rc 2 Rc
(di,j ) da 2 Rc (1 er ) r dr d 2 Rc (5.10)
=1+
1
2 eRc (1 + Rc ) 1 2 2 Rc
According to [57], when the = {x1 , x2 , ...} is a set of Poisson points, with an intensity of , distributed A = f (x) dx. Since, || = A = n, it is possible to write in an area A and SA = xi f (xi ), then S A f (x) SA = nf (x). Here, f (x) = A A dx.
56
CM CH = J
R2
c EDA + 2Eelec +
JCM CH (j, i) da 2 Rc
2 ampf s Rc
2
4 ampf s d0 2 2Rc ampmp
; +
6 d6 Rc 0
Rc d0 otherwise (5.11)
EDA + 2Eelec +
2 3Rc
BST X = J
A
JBST X (i) da A
(5.12)
where, A is the sensor network deployment area. When considering equation (5.3) and BST X depends on both the sensor network deployment (5.12), it can be concluded that J region (shape and dimension) and the base station location. Further, Rc given in equation (5.1), depends on the sensor network deployment shape and dimensions. BST X and Rc (which is necessary in determining J total ) are deIn what follows, how J termined using generic scenarios, covering most of the practical deployment requirements, will be demonstrated. Herein, consideration would be given to a circular deployment area with base station located at the centre of the circle; a rectangular deployment area with base station located at the centre of the rectangle; as well as a rectangular deployment area with base station located at the centre of a longer side of the perimeter. The framework presented below, can be extended for other deployment regions and base station locations.
5.1.1
Circular Deployment Area
Rc given by equation (5.1) can be simplied for a circular deployment area with a radius of r as, Rc = r E [k ] , (5.13)
where, E [k ] is given by equation (4.27). Thus, Rc is a function of R, for a given sensor network setup. BST X given by equation (5.12) can be determined for a circular deployment area with J a radius of r, as, Eelec + JBST X = E elec +
ampf s r
2
4 ampf s d0 2r2 ampmp
; + r6 d6 0 ;
r d0 (5.14) otherwise
3r2
57
5.1.2
Rectangular Deployment Area
Rc for a rectangular deployment area, with dimensions a b can be determined as, Rc = ab , E [k ] (5.15)
where, E [k ] is given by equation (4.24). Thus, Rc is a function of R for a rectangular deployment setup. BST X given by equation (5.12) depends on the shape of the deployment region and J base station location. Base station located at the centre of the rectangle BST X , Following four scenarios as shown in Figure 5.1 have to be considered in determining J for a rectangular area with base station located at the centre. It is assumed that the sides a b, without a loss of generality.
b
d0
Rectangle 1 BS Rectangle 2 Rectangle 3 Rectangle 4
Figure 5.1: Dierent scenarios of rectangular area with BS at the centre
Case 1: Figure 5.1 Rectangle 1, implies BST X = Eelec + J

ampf s
a2 +b2 2
a 2
d0
b 2 b 2
ab 58
(x2 + y 2 ) dy dx
a 2
Case 2: Figure 5.1 Rectangle 2, implies BST X =Eelec J + + 4

ampf s 1 0
a 2 a 2 cos
a 2
d0 <
a2 +b2 2
ab
ampmp
r3 dr d +
0
2 0
d0
/2
r3 dr d +
1 +2 0
b 2 sin
r3 dr d
0
b 2 b 2
ab 4
ampmp
(x2 + y 2 )2 dy dx
a 2 cos
a 2
1 0 0
ab
r dr d +
0 0
d0
/2
r dr d +
1 +2 0
b 2 sin
r5 dr d
where 1 = cos1
a , 3 = cos1 2d0
b 2d0
b 2 d0 0
b 2 b 2
and 2 = /2 (1 + 3 ). d0 <
3 a 2 /2
b 2 sin
Case 3: Figure 5.1 Rectangle 3, implies BST X = Eelec + 4 J + where 1 = sin1

ampf s 1 0
a 2
ab ab
r dr d +
1 0
r3 dr d
ampmp
(x2 + y 2 )2 dy dx
d0 0 /2
a 2
ampmp
1 0
ab
r dr d +
1 0
b 2 sin
r5 dr d
b . 2d0
b 2
Case 4: Figure 5.1 Rectangle 4, implies d0 < BST X = Eelec + J +

4 ampf s d0
2ab ab
a 2
b 2
6 ampmp d0
3ab (x2 + y 2 )2 dy dx
b 2
ampmp
a 2
Base station located at the centre of long side of the perimeter A rectangle with sides a b a/2 will be considered to demonstrate the calculations for a rectangular wireless sensor network, with base station located at the centre of a long side BST X , the four scenarios as shown in Figure 5.2 will be of the perimeter. In determining J considered. Case 1: Figure 5.2 Rectangle 1, implies BST X = Eelec + J
ampf s a 0 0 b
a2 /4 + b2 d0 (x a/2)2 + (y b)2 dy dx
ab
59
b d0 BS Rectangle 1 Rectangle 2 Rectangle 3 Rectangle 4
Figure 5.2: Dierent scenarios of rectangular area with BS at the centre of the long side of perimeter a2 /4 + b2
Case 2: Figure 5.2 Rectangle 2, implies b d0 < BST X =Eelec J + + 2 2

ampf s 1 0 a 0 0 1 0 0 0 b
a 2 cos
ab
ampmp
r dr d +
0 0
d0
/2
r dr d +
1 +2 0
b sin
r3 dr d
ab
ampmp
(x a/2)2 + (y b)2 )2 dy dx
a 2 cos
ab
r dr d +
0 0
d0
/2
r dr d +
1 +2 0
b sin
r5 dr d
where 1 = cos1
a , 3 = cos1 2d0
b d0
a 2
and 2 = /2 (1 + 3 ). d0 < b
/2
Case 3: Figure 5.2 Rectangle 3, implies BST X = Eelec + 2 J + where 1 = cos1

ampf s 1 0 a 0 0 b
a 2 cos
ab ab
r3 dr d +
1 0
d0
r3 dr d
ampmp
(x a/2)2 + (y b)2 )2 dy dx
0 1 0 0
a 2 cos
ampmp
/2
ab
r5 dr d +
1 0
d0
r5 dr d
a . 2d0
60
Case 4: Figure 5.2 Rectangle 4, implies d0 < BST X = Eelec + J +

4 ampf s d0
a 2
4ab ab
0
6 ampmp d0
6ab (x a/2)2 + (y b)2 )2 dy dx

0
ampmp
According to the above analysis, it can be concluded that for any given wireless sensor total = f (R). Hence, it is possible to identify the optimum network deployment setup J R = Ropt , which will minimize the total expected energy cost of the entire sensor bed, by total J solving = 0. Yet due to the complexity of these equations, it is more realistic to use R total vs R computer aided mathematical tool like Matlab in determining the Ropt . Typical J curve for any given wireless sensor network setup is shown in Figure 5.3. This indicates a denite Ropt , corresponding to a given sensor network setup.
total vs R curve for a given WSN Figure 5.3: Typical J Note : This section presented a framework for determining the optimum cluster head candidacy broadcasting range, which would maximize the total wireless sensor network lifetime. Even though, it was assumed that an exponential data correlation model with simple data aggregation technique for this analysis, the above analytical framework can even be easily extendable to other data aggregation models. Further, the proposed framework can be extended to any other wireless sensor network deployment region shapes and base station locations that have not been covered in this section. Correctness of this proposed analytical framework in determining a Ropt will be evaluated using simulation experiments in Section 7.5.1. Thus far, the eect of the cluster head candidacy broadcasting range, R, on the wireless sensor network lifetime has been analyzed. Based on this, the optimum value was identied, 61
for any given sensor network setup, which would minimize the total energy consumption of the entire sensor bed. In what follows, the eect of cluster head role rotation trigger level i on the sensor network lifetime will be determined.
5.2
Computation of Optimum Cluster Head Rotation Trigger Function Parameter, copt
The reason for introducing a cluster head role rotation trigger function i and its eect on the wireless sensor network lifetime is identied rst. All energy aware distributed clustering algorithms for wireless sensor networks, follow the technique of cluster head role rotation, to realize even energy dissipation among sensor nodes in a local neighborhood. Many of such existing clustering algorithms [20] - [24] use time based cluster head role rotation schemes. In this method, the role of cluster heads will change after a xed predetermined time period T . As already discussed, this method has issues such as non-adaptability to unforeseen environmental changes resulting in unexpected node energy dissipation rate; non-applicability with hybrid energy nodes2 ; and inability to use in heterogeneous energy sensor networks. However, these issues can be avoided using the residual energy based cluster head role rotation technique as in EDCR algorithm. This technique allows the cluster head rotation trigger threshold level to be dierent for dierent nodes, and dierent for the same node at dierent instances, depending on the node residual energy. For this purpose, EDCR algorithm has introduced a dynamically calculated cluster
t t head energy threshold value, i which is given by, i = c.Eresi |t= . Here, Eresi |t= is the
residual energy of a cluster head i, when it broadcasts its cluster head candidacy at time t = , and c [0, 1] is a predetermined constant. This implies, that the number of data gathering rounds of EDCR algorithm can be changed dynamically depending on the residual energy of the cluster heads via parameter c. Following two extreme cases for c needs to be highlighted. Case 1 : If c 1, then there will be frequent cluster head role rotations. This allows, an even distribution of the cluster head role among nodes in the network, where each node expends its energy at the same pace, resulting in a sharp edge in the lifetime curve. However, frequent cluster head role rotations would result in, considerable energy overhead in control and coordination messages during cluster set up. As a result, overall use of energy for useful work will be less. Hence, even though the lifetime curve has a sharp edge, the useful lifetime
2
Hybrid energy nodes charge their own batteries using environment energy harvesting techniques.
62
of the wireless sensor network will be reduced (Refer Figure 5.4). Case 2 : On the other hand, when c 0, the cluster head role rotations will be less frequent, resulting in low energy overheads. As a result, cluster head nodes would not have enough energy to act as regular nodes after relinquishing the cluster head role. This would result in a lifetime curve that is less steep (Refer Figure 5.4).
Number of Live Nodes
c -> 1
Optimum
c -> 0
c
Data Transmission Rounds
Figure 5.4: Lifetime of WSN with respect to the change of c Ideally, based on PNA lifetime measurement metric, an optimal value for c = copt can be selected as shown in Figure 5.4. In what follows, an analytical technique for determining copt , for a given wireless sensor network deployment requirement will be presented. copt can be dened as the value of c which would allow the maximization of sensor network lifetime with local energy balancing [79]. First, following assumptions are made. N number of sensor nodes are evenly distributed among E [k ] number of clusters. Hence, each cluster consists of N/E [k ] number of sensor nodes. This fact is used to simplify the mathematical model by assuming that once the clusters are setup, the members do not move outside the cluster. That is, the cluster head role is rotated among the same set of nodes. Each node in a given cluster, gets an opportunity to become a cluster head in round robin fashion such that the physical position of subsequent cluster head is exchanged with current cluster head facilitating cluster head to be at the centre of the cluster similar to a global re-clustering. Note : EDCR algorithm follows global re-clustering which would result in subsequent 63
clusters being dierent to previous clusters in terms of boundary and the set of members. Since, EDCR algorithm uses global re-clustering for cluster head role rotation, cluster head is found close to the centre of the cluster area. Hence, the statistical eort of this is similar to considering a cluster with xed set of member nodes, where cluster head role is rotated by local delegation along with position exchange. Hence, above assumptions are reasonable. The energy consumed by a node can be categorized into four dierent types, in line with optimal cluster head role rotation. They are: 1. The total energy spent by a node as a cluster head, in a given data transmission round, for useful work, ECH . 2. The total energy spent by a node as a non cluster head, in a given data transmission round, for useful work, EnonCH . 3. The energy overhead that a node has to spend as a cluster head, in a cluster setup phase, ECHoh . 4. The energy overhead that a node has to spend as a non cluster head, in each cluster setup phase, EnonCHoh . Some of the analytical equations presented in Section 5.1 for the calculation of the above mentioned four types of energy consumptions by a node, will be employed in this analysis. The amount of energy spent by a cluster head i of the EDCR algorithm, in a given data transmission round for useful work (i.e. handling of node), consists of following energies: 1. Receiving data packets from all member nodes, ECH Rx ECH Rx = Eelec 2. Data aggregation cost, ECH Da ECH Da = EDA N E [k ] N 1 E [k ] bit data packets from each member
3. Transmission of the aggregated data to base station located di,BS distance from the node, ECH T x ECH T x = 1 + N 1 E [k ] JBST X (i)
where JBST X (i) and are given by equations (5.3) and (5.10) respectively. 64
Based on this, total energy cost per cluster head, for useful work is denoted as ECH . This can be shown as, ECH = ECH Rx + ECH Da + ECH T x (5.16)
The energy cost spent by each non cluster head node depends on its location relative to its cluster head, in a given cluster. Next, EnonCH will be dened as the average energy spent by a non cluster head node in a given cluster. Thus, EnonCH can be denoted as: CM CH EDA Eelec EnonCH = J (5.17)
CM CH is given by equation (5.11). Further, J CM CH has included energy cost where, J spent by a cluster head in receiving and aggregating a one bit. Therefore, these energy CM CH . costs are removed by deducting EDA and Eelec from J The energy overhead that a cluster head node has to spend in a cluster setup phase of EDCR algorithm consists of: 1. Energy for the cluster head candidacy broadcast, ECH can can Eelec + can ampf s R2 ECH can = can Eelec + can ampmp R4 where,
can
; ;
R d0 R > d0
is the candidacy message packet length and R is the candidacy message
broadcast range. 2. Energy for the reception of join request messages from all of its members, ECH join ECH join = where,
join join
Eelec
N 1 E [k ]
is the length of the join request packet.
3. Energy cost of broadcasting the TDMA schedule among its members, ECH tdma tdma Eelec + tdma ampf s R2 ; R d0 ECH tdma = tdma Eelec + tdma ampmp R4 ; R > d0 where,
tdma
is the TDMA schedule message packet length.
4. Energy cost of broadcasting the maximum energy level of the cluster to neighboring cluster heads within 2R + distance, ECH en en Eelec + en ampf s (2R + )2 ECH en = en Eelec + en ampmp (2R + )4 where,
en
; ;
2R + d0 2R + > d0
is the length of the control packet which broadcast the maximum energy
level of its cluster. 65
5. Energy cost of receiving the maximum energy level from neighboring cluster heads (based on the observation that there are on average 6 neighbors), ECH enr ECH enr = 6 Therefore, ECHoh = ECH can + EChjoin + ECH tdma + ECH en + ECH enr . (5.18)
en
Eelec
The energy overhead of an average non cluster head node j is denoted by EnonCHoh . This consists of energy spent in sending the cluster join packet to its cluster head node i, and the amount of energy dissipated during the cluster head candidacy broadcast packet reception. Therefore, EnonCHoh can be denoted as, EnonCHoh =
join
CM CH EDA Eelec + J
can
Eelec
(5.19)
CM CH is given by equation (5.11). where, J Note : Above equations depend on E [k ] and Rc . As presented in previous sections E [k ] and Rc depend on the exact cluster deployment region dimensions. For a rectangular deployment area, E [k ] and Rc are given by equations (4.24) and (5.15) respectively. Similarly, for a circular deployment region, E [k ] and Rc are given by equations (4.27) and (5.13) respectively. Accordingly, it can be concluded that EnonCH , ECHoh and EnonCHoh are invariant to the location of the cluster, with respect to the base station for a given setup. However, ECH depends on the location of the cluster. Now, it will be assumed that, each node in a given cluster, gets a chance to become a cluster head in round robin fashion, as shown in the Figure 5.5. Further, Epoch can be dened as the number of data transmission rounds that all nodes in a cluster serve as a cluster head once. Xj,i is the number of data transmission rounds that node i serves as a cluster head in the j th Epoch. Ej,i,p is the residual energy level of a node p, at the beginning of the node i cluster head period, in the Epoch j . Furthermore, it is assumed that all nodes have E0 energy at the beginning of the Epoch 0. Hence, E0,0,p = E0 It can be shown by iteration, Xj,i = (1 c)Ej,i,i ECHoh ECH (5.21) p 0, 1, .., N 1 E [k ] (5.20)
66
Data Transfer Rounds
CH #0 CH #1 CH #2
CH
CH
CH
CH
CH
CH
CH
CH
CH
CH #i
CH
CH
CH
#(N/E[k]-1)
CH
CH
CH
Epoch #0
Epoch #1
Epoch #j-1
Epoch #j
Figure 5.5: Round robin CH selection E0 i1 X0,k EnonCH E0 iEnonCHoh k =0 N 1 E [k ] N cE 1 EnonCHoh Xj 1,k EnonCH j 1,0,0 E [k ] = k=1 N cEj 1,i,i 1 EnonCHoh E [k ] N 1 E [k ] i1 Xj 1,k + Xj,k EnonCH k=i+1 k=0
; ;
j = 0, i = 0 j = 0, i 1
Ej,i,i
j 1, i = 0
j 1, i 1 (5.22)
It should be noted that, ECH > EnonCH and ECHoh > EnonCHoh . Hence, using equations (5.21) and (5.22), Xj,0 > Xj,1 > ... > Xj,
N 1 E [k ]
X0,i > X1,i > ... > Xj,i

t t t can be shown. Further, it can be shown that Eres < Eres < ... < Eres 0 1
N 1 E [k ]
t where, Eres i
67
is the residual energy of node i at any given time t. Hence, it can be concluded that node 0 will die rst. Without loss of generality, it can be assumed that the node 0 would deplete its energy, during Epoch j when the node i is acting as the cluster head. Therefore, the residual energy of node 0 at the beginning of node i cluster head role, in Epoch j , can be given by,
i 1
Ej,i,0 = cEj,0,0 (i 1) EnonCHoh

k=1
Xj,k
EnonCH
; i=0
(5.23)
Next, is denoted as the total number of data transmission rounds, that node 0 completes before its total energy depletes. The consists of two portions given by 1 and 2 . Here, 1 represents the total number of data transmission rounds that node 0 is alive, excluding the data transmission rounds it spends with the last cluster head, before it dies. 2 is the number of data transmission rounds that node 0 spends with its last cluster head, before it dies.
j 1
N 1 E [k ]
i1
Xp,q +
p=0 i1 q =0 q =0 q =0
Xj,q
; j1 (5.24) ; j=0
1 =
X0,q
2 =
Ej,i,0 EnonCHoh EnonCH Ej,0,0 ECHoh ECH
; i=0 (5.25) ; i=0
It can be noted that, is a function of c. That is, = 1 + 2 = f (c). (5.26)
The objective is to maximize with respect to c. In order to do this, computer aided numerical technique can be used. Hence, when max(), then c copt . That is, max() = f (copt ) EDCR algorithm uses copt to achieve local energy balancing by cluster head role rotation, while minimizing the energy overhead in such an operation, resulting in the desired lifetime curve for a local neighborhood. Based on the analysis, it is clear that the copt is a function of ECH , which again depends on the location of the cluster, relative to the base station. Hence, it can be stated that copt (dCHi ,BS ) is location dependant. Given this fact, if a unique c is set for each node i using ci = copt (dCHi ,BS ), and all nodes deployed with equal energy 68
of E0 , then the cluster head i which rst reach ci E0 would trigger the re-clustering for the entire network. Following hypothetical example is considered for this discussion now. There is a requirement to monitor a circular eld with a radius of 150m, with base station at the centre, using ad-hoc deployed wireless sensors, having 5m as the expected distance of two neighboring nodes. The expected compressibility of any two adjoining nodes would be 0.1, resulting in the exponential data correlation parameter, = 0.0211. Hence, it is required to deploy 707 nodes in this eld. It will be assumed that each node would be equipped with batteries having an initial energy of E0 = 1 J. R is set as R = Ropt = 26 m. A cluster head in a closest neighborhood to the base station is named as p while a cluster head in a neighborhood at an average distance to the base station is named as q , and the cluster head of a far apart neighborhood is named as r. Thus, on average, it can be assumed that the distance of p,q ,and r to the base station as dCHp ,BS = 18 m, dCHq ,BS = 100 m and dCHr ,BS = 133 m respectively. According to the equation (5.16), it can be found that the energy expenditure by each of these cluster heads, in a given round of data gathering, as ECHp = 0.0011 J, ECHq = 0.0018 J and ECHr = 0.0034 J. This reconrms that a cluster head closest to the base station spends less energy (ECHp < ECHq < ECHr ). When the method proposed in nding copt above is use, it can be found that coptp = 0.890, coptq = 0.825 and coptr = 0.680 respectively for cluster heads p, q and r (coptp > coptq > coptr ). Therefore, using (1 copt )E0 /ECH , it can be calculated that the time at which, each cluster head would be triggered for a re-clustering phase. Hence, re-clustering would be triggered by cluster head p,q and r after 100.0, 97.2 and 94.1 rounds respectively. Thus, even if each cluster head selects the calculated copt based on their own neighborhood information as c, in making the re-clustering trigger point, cluster head r will alarm base station for a re-clustering. This will happen after 94.1 data gathering rounds. Since, EDCR algorithm uses global re-clustering, there is no eect in having a unique c for each cluster head. In other words, the result of having individual optimum value is identical to having coptr for the entire network. If it is assumed, c = coptr = 0.680 for the entire sensor network, then, when the reclustering is triggered, residual energy of these cluster heads would be as follows.
69
Eresr coptr E0 = 0.680 This is the ecient rotation level for CH r. Eresq E0 ECHq (1 coptr ) E0 ECHr = 0.8306
This is close to ecient rotation level value of CH q , coptq E0 = .825 Eresp E0 ECHp (1 coptr ) E0 ECHr = 0.8965
This is close to ecient rotation level value of CH p, coptp E0 = .890 Similarly, when considering the eect of selecting c = coptp = .890 for the entire sensor network, again re-clustering would be triggered by the cluster head r, as its energy dissipation rate is higher than others (ECHp < ECHq < ECHr ). Here, re-clustering will be triggered after (1 coptp )E0 /ECHr = 32.4 rounds. At this moment, the residual energy of each cluster head is as follows.
Eresr coptp E0 = 0.890 However the ecient rotation level of CH r is coptr E0 = 0.680 Eresq E0 ECHq 1 coptp E0 ECHr = 0.942
However the ecient rotation level of CH q is coptq E0 = 0.825 Eresp E0 ECHp 1 coptp E0 ECHr = 0.964
However ecient rotation level of CH p is coptp E0 = 0.890 This shows that, when c = coptp , re-clustering happens at an unfavorable moment for all cluster heads. Further, the analysis given above recommends the use of one c for the entire wireless sensor network. At the same time, this value should be derived by considering a cluster located at a far distance to the base station. This will make a favorable pact for all cluster heads to enhance their lifetime. Correctness of the proposed analytical framework in determining copt will be evaluated using simulation experiments in Section 7.5.2.
70
5.3
Estimation of Second Degree Neighborhood Determining Parameter for a Given Wireless Sensor Network Setup
Proper estimation of the second degree neighborhood SN i of a given cluster head i is important for eective operation of the EDCR algorithm. SN i is determined by 2R + (as given in Section 3.2.4 and Figure 3.1), which represents the most likely upper bound for maximum distance between two neighboring cluster heads. Hence, it is required to estimate the most likely upper bound for the maximum distance between two neighboring cluster heads to determine . In what follows, most likely upper bound for the maximum distance between two neighboring cluster heads will be determined. According to the Figure 5.6, dCH CH = 2R + = q (5.27)
max
is the upper bound distance between cluster head nodes C1 and C2. Further, there are no sensor nodes in the region shaded gray in Figure 5.6. Without losing the generality, it is considered that C1 as the (0,0) location of the Cartesian coordinates and C1,C2 line as the y axis. Before moving forward, the denition of a neighboring cluster head is presented. Neighboring Cluster Head : There should be a common boundary between given two cluster heads for them to be neighbors. It can be safely assumed that the boundary between two cluster heads, is the perpendicular bisector of the line joining them, since the nodes join the cluster of the closest cluster head in its neighborhood. Now, it will be attempted to determine P , which is dened as the maximum probability where there are no nodes in the region shaded gray, with area Abcgf , bounded by the points B,C,G and F for a given R and q as shown in Figure 5.6. Typically, for a given node density , P will be maximized for the minimum Abcgf (R, q, ) since, P = P (n = 0|Abcgf (R, q, )) = eAbcgf (R,q,) P will be maximized for a given R and q with following constraints. 1. C2 is a neighbor of C1. yp q 2 (5.29) (5.28)
71
Figure 5.6: Constraints for maximum inter CH distance
2. C3 and C4 cannot be within C1 and C2 broadcasting range.

2 2 |C 1 C 3| R = a2 1 + b1 R 2 2 |C 1 C 4| R = a2 2 + b2 R 2 2 |C 2 C 3| R = a2 1 + (b1 q ) R 2 2 |C 2 C 4| R = a2 2 + (b2 q ) R
(5.30) (5.31) (5.32) (5.33)
3. Broadcast range of C3 and C4 should intersect with the broadcast range of C1 and C2.
2 2 |C 1 C 3| 2R = a2 1 + b1 4R 2 2 |C 1 C 4| 2R = a2 2 + b2 4R 2 2 |C 2 C 3| 2R = a2 1 + (b1 q ) 4R 2 2 |C 2 C 4| 2R = a2 2 + (b2 q ) 4R
(5.34) (5.35) (5.36) (5.37)
72
4. C3 and C4 should not be within each others broadcasting range. |C 3 C 4| R = (a1 + a2 )2 + (b1 b2 )2 R2 5. C1 and C2 should not have a common broadcasting range. |C 1 C 2| 2R = q 2R and (5.39) (5.38)
a1 , a2 , b1 , b2 0
(5.40)
According to the Figure 5.6, area Abcgf (R, q, ) should be minimized when it is symmetric around the y axis (C1C2 line). Using this fact, it is possible to write a1 = a2 = a and b1 = b2 = b. By solving the equation for lines AB and CD, the coordinates of point P= (xp , yp ) can be derived. Therefore, xp = 0 , y p = a2 + b2 2b
Based on this, it can be concluded that the centers C3= (a, b) and C4= (a, b) would be on a circle given by, a2 + (b yp )2 = yp 2 with the constraints laid by equations (5.29) to (5.40). Figure 5.7 shows the movement of possible a and b. According to this, area Abcgf (R, q, ) is smallest for a given q when yp = q/2. Based on this fact, along with equations (5.29)(5.41), it is possible to state that a and b varies subject to the following constraints. a2 + b q 2
2
(5.41)
q2 4
(5.42) (5.43) (5.44) (5.45) (5.46) (5.47) (5.48)
a2 + b2 R2 a2 + b2 4R2 a2 + (b q )2 R2 a2 + ( b q )2 4R 2 a R 2
q 2R
73
Figure 5.7: Movement of a and b
According to the above equations, movement of a and b along the circle q q2 a2 + (b )2 = 2 4 is constrained by following two scenarios. Case 1 : When 2R q 5R a and b are bounded by a2 + b2 R2 a2 + (b q )2 R2 Case 2 : When 5R q 8R a and b are bounded by a2 + b2 4R2 a2 + (b q )2 4R2 Case 3 : When q > 8R there is no feasible solution.
74
Hence, it is possible to conclude that for 2R q a= where , cos1

2R q 2 R 2 q2
8R, (a, b) can be given by, (5.49)
q q cos() , b = [1 + sin()] 2 2
, cos1
2R
q 2 R2 q2
; 2R q
5R
cos1
4R
q 2 4R2 q2
, cos1
4R
q 2 4R2 q2
5R q
8R
Numerical evaluations indicate that the area Abcgf (R, q, ) will be minimized for any given R and q when = 0. i.e. a = q/2 and b = q/2. In order to prove this, a formula for Abcgf (R, q, ) would be rst identied. Here, coordinates of points B,F,G and C are dened as (xb , yb ), (xf , yf ), (xg , yg ), and (xc , yc ) respectively. Based on the symmetry, it can be denoted that, xb = xc , yb = yc , xf = xg , yf = yg where, xc , yc , xg and yg are given by, xc = xg = a b b + a , yc = 2 2 where = 4R2 a2 b2 a2 + b2 4R2 a2 (q b)2 a2 + (q b)2
a (q b) (q + b) a , yg = 2 2
where =
It is possible to present the area Abcgf (R, q, ) as, Abcgf (R, q, ) = T Rbcgf (Sc1bc Tc1bc ) (Sc2f g Tc2f g ) (Sc3bf Tc3bf ) (Sc4cg Tc4cg ) (5.50)
where, T Rbcgf is the area of a trapezium with vertexes B,C,G,F; Sc1bc is the area of a sector of circle, with points C1,B,C. Tc1bc is the area of a triangle with vertices of C1,B,C (rest of the notation too follow the same meaning). Due to symmetry, it can be concluded that, Abcgf (R, q, ) = T Rbcgf (Sc1bc Tc1bc ) (Sc2f g Tc2f g ) 2(Sc4cg Tc4cg ) (5.51)
75
where, T Rbcgf = (xc + xg ) (yg yc ) Tc1bc = xc yc xc = R2 sin1 R (5.52) (5.53) (5.54) (5.55) (5.56) (5.57) (5.58)
Sc1bc
Tc4cg
Tc2f g = xg (q yg ) xg Sc2f g = R2 sin1 R |R | |GC | GC = cos sin1 2 2R | |GC Sc4cg = R2 sin1 2R
where |= |GC It can be shown that

dAbcgf (R,q,) d =0
(xc xg )2 + (yc yg )2 = 0. Further, Abcgf (R, q, 0) < Abcgf (R, q, )

0
Hence, it is possible to conclude that Abcgf (R, q, ) for a given R and q , where 2R q Abcgf (R, q, 0) = where, = 8R 2 q 2 . q2 = Abcgf (R, q, 0)
min
8R. Additionally, it is possible to prove that, q (1 ) 4R q2 1 2 16 (5.59)
q 2 (1 )2 4 R2 sin1 4
Based on this analysis, it is possible to nd the maximum probability of the maximum distance between any two neighboring cluster heads to be q (> 2R), when there are no nodes in the area Abcgf (R, q, )
min
. This can be derived by equation (5.28) as follows. = P (n = 0|Abcgf (R, q, 0)) = eAbcgf (R,q,0)
P n = 0|Abcgf (R, q, )
min
Therefore, it should be possible to observe f (q ) number of occurrences of q (> 2R) as the maximum distance between two neighboring cluster heads, out of Nt number of independent sensor network setups, where f (q ) is given by f (q ) = Nt P (n = 0|Abcgf (R, q, 0)) Hence, expected maximum distance between neighboring cluster heads E [q ] can be written as E [q ] =
q
q f (q )
q
f (q )
76
Since, q is continuous, it is possible to present E [q ] as, E [q ] =

8R qf (q )dq 2R 8R 2R f (q )dq 8R qP (n = 0|Abcgf (R, q, 0)) dq 2R 8R 2R P (n = 0|Abcgf (R, q, 0)) dq
(5.60)
Now considering the average of equation (5.27), it is possible to nd = E [q ] 2R =

8R qP (n = 0|Abcgf (R, q, 0)) dq 2R 8R 2R P (n = 0|Abcgf (R, q, 0)) dq
2R.
(5.61)
Hence, equation (5.61) can be used for the determination of EDCR algorithm, second degree neighborhood determining parameter at the design stage. Note : Answer for the above integrals are dicult to nd in symbolic form. Therefore, it is necessary to use computer aided numerical integration techniques in evaluating them. For example, when there is a sensor network with node deployment density of = 0.01, i.e. the expected distance between two neighboring nodes is 5 m, it can be expected that the maximum possible distance between two neighboring cluster heads to be 55.3 m and 105.5 m respectively, where R is set to 25 m and 50 m respectively.
77
CHAPTER 6
Global Energy Balancing

The applicability of the EDCR algorithm in scenarios where, cluster heads to base station communication follows direct data transfer as shown in Figure 6.1 was discussed in the previous chapters. However, this mechanism has a negative impact on the nodes which
Figure 6.1: Single-hop cluster based WSN organization
are far away from the base station, as they die much rapidly due to the long distance communication. This eect is signicant for wireless sensor networks, where the dimensions of the deployment area are large and the base station is located far away from the sensor bed. However, use of multi-hop communication between cluster head and base station can save the energy of nodes located at a distance by eliminating the necessity of long distance communication to reach the base station. This will be realized by, transmitting the aggregated data from each cluster head to close by cluster head, which stay towards the base station. Thereafter, this packet will be relayed to next closest cluster head towards the base station, until it reaches the base station as shown in Figure 6.2. Further, existing literature such as [80] have shown that, multi-hop communication requires lesser total communication energy than single-hop communication, when the distance between two nodes is large and radio propagation exponent, n is greater than 3 for time synchronized nodes. Therefore, 78
multi-hop communication over a cluster head overlay has an advantage for cluster head to base station communication, as the distance is signicant and radio propagation follows multi-path fading model, where radio propagation exponent, n is 4.
Figure 6.2: Multi-hop cluster based WSN organization
The modications to the EDCR algorithm to facilitate multi-hop communication from cluster heads to base station is presented below.
6.1
EDCR in Multi-hop Network Setup
The EDCR algorithm presented in Chapter 3, uses cluster heads to directly communicate with the base station. The algorithm has four phases as given below. 1. Cluster head candidacy 2. Cluster head selection and cluster formation 3. Periodic data gathering 4. Cluster head role rotation The proposed modication to EDCR algorithm will add a new phase between phase 2 and 3 given above to facilitate multi-hop data transmission from cluster heads to base station. In this phase, each cluster head will identify its next-hop cluster head towards the base station. Cluster heads will forward their aggregated data packets or any incoming relay packets to the identied next-hop cluster head. The modied version of this algorithm is named as EDCR-MH and it is presented in [81]. Following description would be on the modications to EDCR algorithm, especially with respect to distributed identication of the next-hop cluster head for each cluster head in deriving EDCR-MH algorithm. 79
6.1.1
Identication of Next-hop Cluster Head
The base station broadcasts heart beat or hello messages, covering the entire wireless sensor network deployment region. The level of transmission power used for broadcasting this message is included in the message itself. Hence, all nodes can compute an approximate distance to the base station, using the received signal strength1 and the transmission power of this message. Then, each cluster head node broadcasts this information with its local neighboring cluster heads (up to 2R + radius) at the end of each cluster head selection
and cluster formation phase. It is referred that the set of all these neighbor cluster heads of a given cluster head node i as N Hi where, N Hi = j |j H Ni2R+ . (6.1)
The set of neighbor cluster heads denoted by N Hi is identical to the set of neighboring cluster heads that the algorithm considered in nding the relative residual energy in a given second degree neighborhood. Each cluster head i H will determine its potential next-hop cluster head node denoted by CHTi ( N Hi ) . This will be given by: CHTi = k min (di,k + dk,BS ) , (6.2)
kN Hi
where dp,q is the distance between any nodes (or node and base station) p and q . It can be denoted that the next hop of any cluster head node i as N Hopi . This can be either the base station (BS ) or CHTi and the decision is made by cluster head i itself following, BS ; if N Hi = or dBS,i < dT H or dBS,i < dCHTi ,i or dBS,i < dBS,CHTi N Hopi = (6.3) CH ; Otherwise Ti Use of dT H guarantees that nodes at the close by proximity to the base station would not select another relay cluster head node. If not for this constraint, all the relay messages would pass through the closest cluster head to the base station, especially in a rectangular sensor bed where the base station is located on the centre of the perimeter or out of the deployment region. This would unduly burden the most close by cluster head. Based on this, cluster head nodes in the shaded area of Figure 6.3 would never relay through another cluster head. In other words, they always directly send their own aggregated cluster data packets and any incoming relay data packets to the base station.
Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) is a common hardware functional block available with the RF Transceiver chips suitable for wireless sensor nodes.
1
80
Figure 6.3: Area where CHs would never relay through another CH
Note : When the base station is located within the sensor bed (especially at the center), it is possible to set dT H = 0 due to the fact that the closest cluster heads to the base station usually placed symmetrically around it. This symmetry eliminates the tendency of all the cluster heads to relay through one cluster head in a given instance as mentioned above.
6.1.2
Determination of Ropt and copt for EDCR-MH
As discussed in Chapter 5, the ecient operation of EDCR algorithm is determined by optimum selection of cluster head candidacy broadcasting radius, Ropt and cluster head rotation trigger function parameter, copt . The eect of multi-hop communication between cluster heads and base station on these parameters will be analyzed below. Eect of Ropt The method proposed in Section 5.1 in determining the optimum cluster head broadcasting radius, Ropt for EDCR is extended to nd the same for EDCR-MH. The main dierence in the two algorithms is that the aggregated data packet which was sent directly to the base station from cluster heads now been sent via cluster heads overlay using multi-hoping. total is still applicable. However, J BST X which represents Hence, equation 5.9 denoting J the average energy cost of transferring one bit of data from any cluster head to base station needs to be modied to account for multi-hop data transfer as described above. Therefore, it BST X by multiplying the energy cost of one hop communication is possible to approximate J (between a cluster head to neighboring cluster head) with the average number of hops. can be dened as the average number of hops to reach the base station from an average h CH,BS to the base station. As stated in Section 4.2.6, the average cluster, at a distance of d 81
distance between two neighboring cluster heads is given by DCH CH (= 1.3493R). When these facts are considered together, it can be stated that, CH CH d CH,BS . hD This is due to the random orientation of next hop cluster heads resulting that, they do not lie on a straight line between the data originating cluster head and the base station. Therefore, it can be stated that, = dCH,BS h DCH CH (6.4)
1 represents an average increase of the path, due to multi-hopping nodes not where, on the same straight line joining source and destination. Figure 6.4 is referred to derive a . According to this, can be approximated to, reasonable approximation for
= 1/cos()
BS i
BS k BS j Max = 1/cos(/6)
Min = 1
0 < < /6 CH /6
= 1/cos(/12)
Figure 6.4: Determination of
= Now, BST X = J h h
2 ampf s DCH CH
1 . cos(/12)
(6.5)
1)Eelec + (2h
; ;
DCH CH < d0 DCH CH d0
(6.6)
4 ampmp DCH CH + (2h 1)Eelec
As it has discussed in Section 5.1, for any given wireless sensor network deployment setup, total = f (R). This is still applicable for EDCR-MH. Hence, it is possible to identify J 82
the optimum R = Ropt which will minimize the total expected energy cost of the entire total J sensor bed with EDCR-MH by solving = 0. However, due to the complexity of the R equations, computer aided mathematical tool such as Matlab is used in determining the Ropt . Eect on copt As discussed in Section 5.2, the optimum value for cluster head rotation trigger function parameter c can be determined using equations (5.21) - (5.26). Further, these equations are directly depend on: 1. The total energy spent by a node as a cluster head, in a given data transmission round, for useful work, ECH . 2. The total energy spent by a node as a non cluster head, in a given data transmission round, for useful work, EnonCH . 3. The energy overhead that a node has to spend as a cluster head, in a cluster setup phase, ECHoh . 4. The energy overhead that a node has to spend as a non cluster head, in each cluster setup phase, EnonCHoh . The equations (5.17)-(5.19) clearly indicate that EnonCH , ECHoh and EnonCHoh are independent of cluster heads to base station data transmission mode (i.e. direct or multi-hopping). On the other hand, according to equation (5.16), ECH depends on the cluster head to base station data transmission mode. Therefore, ECH of EDCR-MH can be represented by, ECH = ECH Rx + ECH Da + ECH T x + ECH Relay where, 1. ECH Rx is the cost of receiving data packets from all member nodes. This is given by, ECH Rx = Eelec N 1 . E [k ] (6.7)
2. ECH Da is the data aggregation cost. This is given by, ECH Da = EDA N . E [k ]
83
3. ECH T x is the cost of transmitting the aggregated data to the next hop cluster head. 2 1+ EN ; DCH CH < d0 ampf s DCH CH [k ] 1 ECH T x = 4 1+ EN ; DCH CH d0 ampmp DCH CH [k ] 1 4. ECH Relay is the cost of relaying any data packets from other cluster heads to next hop cluster head. p 1+ ECH Relay = p 1+
N E [k ] N E [k ]
1 1
2 ampf s DCH CH 4 ampmp DCH CH
; ;
DCH CH < d0 DCH CH d0
where, p is the average number of relay packets and it can be approximated as, p = A2 , A1
in line with Figure 6.5. A1 represents the total area of clusters placed at an average CH,BS and A2 represents the total area beyond area A1 . Further, it distance of d is assumed that all the data packets generated in clusters located in A2 area goes through one and only one of the cluster heads in area A1 due to multi-hopping. Note : is a data packet length in bits and is given by equation (5.10). All other notations have usual meanings. Equations (5.17)-(5.19) and (6.7) can be used in nding EnonCH , ECHoh , EnonCHoh and ECH respectively for EDCR-MH algorithm. These can be used in calculating copt for any cluster produced by EDCR-MH algorithm following the same technique proposed in Section 5.2. Further, Section 5.2 has proven that all cluster heads should use copt derived for the cluster head that spends the highest amount of energy in the system. Therefore, closest cluster to the base station is considered in calculating copt for EDCR-MH algorithm. Simulation experiments related to EDCR-MH is presented in Section 7.6. The proposed EDCR-MH has a signicant improvement in the global energy balancing compared to EDCR, especially with large dimensional sensor networks. However, the burden of far end cluster heads are now been passed to the close by cluster heads to the base station. Hence, still there are limitations of global energy balancing.
6.1.3
Limitations of the EDCR-MH Algorithms
The nodes located far away from the base station, expire much faster than the nodes located closer to the base station, in EDCR algorithm, due to long distance direct data transmission between cluster head and base station, during the cluster head role of nodes. On the other 84
BS A1 A1 BS A2 A2
A1
A2 BS dCH,BS A1 A2 DCH,CH
BS
Figure 6.5: Expected number of relay packets by an average CH, p =
A2 A1
hand, nodes located closer to the base station, expire rapidly than the nodes located far away, in EDCR-MH, due to extensive relaying of data packets, during the cluster head role. This indicates that, even though, EDCR and EDCR-MH algorithms can realize a balance in local energy dissipation rate, they have limitations in balancing the global energy dissipation rate. Above facts clearly indicate that there should be a good strategy to evenly drain the energy of all nodes irrespective of node location to improve the lifetime of wireless sensor network as a whole. There is an algorithm in literature, named e3D [82] which has proposed a mixed strategy of direct and minimum distance multi-hop transmission between all nodes and base station, facilitating global energy balancing. It should be noted that, e3D algorithm is not a cluster based algorithm. In e3D algorithm, initially all nodes use multi-hop technique in sending their data packets to the base station. Thus, they relay their data packets to the closest neighbor node towards the base station. This algorithm allows any node to refuse relaying any incoming packets from neighboring nodes, once its residual energy drops below a certain level. Then, the node that was relaying through the node which refused relaying would directly transmit the data packet to the base station. This 85
allows the relay node to save energy to transmit own packets, rest of the lifetime of sensor network. Based on simulation results, [82] suggest a node should stop relaying packets, once its energy drops to 50% of the initial energy level to realize the optimal lifetime of entire wireless sensor network. Further, it should be highlighted that, this research has clearly identied that the cluster based data gathering is superior to direct and minimum distance multi-hop transmission between all nodes and base station in wireless sensor networks due to many reasons (in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2). With this background, an extension to EDCR algorithm is presented below, by the name EDCR-EB [83]. This would facilitate the realization of global energy balancing of EDCR class of algorithms. EDCR-EB is a combination of EDCR and EDCR-MH employing the strategy of e3D algorithm.
6.2
EDCR-EB Algorithm
This section outlines the salient features of the proposed EDCR-EB algorithm and the logic behind the modications carried out on the EDCR/EDCR-MH algorithms to realize this. According to the previous discussions, the following can be concluded: 1. EDCR algorithm has achieved even energy balancing among nodes in a local neighborhood. This is the key factor for the lifetime improvement of the EDCR algorithm. However, when the sensor bed dimensions are larger, the nodes that are located in region A of Figure 6.6 tend to die rst and faster. This is a result of the cluster heads in region A having to facilitate direct communication over a long distance. This in turn reduces the lifetime of the entire sensor bed due to the uneven energy depletion of the sensor bed. 2. To circumvent the issues in item 1, EDCR-MH algorithm is adopted. The most attractive feature of this algorithm is that it enables the cluster heads in region A of Figure 6.6 to use minimum distance multi-hop communication from a cluster head to another in reaching the base station. As a result, the energy expenditure of cluster heads in region A of Figure 6.6 reduces and in turn improve the lifetime of the sensor bed. However, this exercise imposes an additional burden on the cluster heads in region B of Figure 6.6 due to excessive energy cost of processing and relaying of incoming packets . Hence, the cluster heads in region B tends to die rst and faster. This also reduces the lifetime of the sensor bed for the same reason given above.
86
Region A
k-1 k-2 i 3 2 1
k-1
BS
Region B
Figure 6.6: WSN deployment regions
Hence, the requirement is to keep the desirable features of both algorithms intact while ensuring that the energy dissipation in both regions A and B are comparable. To achieve this, following procedure is carried out. Initially, the sensor bed is set to operate according to the features of the EDCR-MH algorithm where, the conditions stipulated in item 2 are applicable. It should be noted that, according to EDCR-MH, any cluster head node i rst
t reaching its residual energy, Eres to re-clustering trigger threshold level, T i will trigger a i
re-clustering of the entire sensor network. It is assumed that, cluster head nodes 0, 1, 2, .., (k 2), (k 1) shown in the Figure 6.6 are generated using EDCR-MH algorithm. Further, when it is assumed that the initial energy of all nodes are identical, i.e.
t t t t Eres | = Eres | = ... = Eres | = ... = Eres | , 0 t=T0 1 t=T0 i t=T0 (k1) t=T0
then, following
t T i = c Eresi |t=T
(6.8)
from Section 3.2, it is possible to write

T0 T0 0 T 0 = 1 = ... = (k1) .
Further, it is known that the energy expenditure of cluster heads closer to the base station is higher than the rest in EDCR-MH. Hence, it is possible to write,
t t t dEres dEres dEres (k1) 0 1 < < ... < dt dt dt
87
t dEres i where, is the energy expenditure rate (negative value of rate of change of energy) of dt a given cluster head node i. Therefore, cluster head node 0 will deplete its residual energy
0 to T 0 rst and will trigger a re-clustering. Hence, if it is assumed that the initial energies
of all nodes are equal, then the cluster head nodes that are closest to the base station would always trigger re-clustering when EDCR-MH algorithm is used. To circumvent this issue, the EDCR-MH algorithm will be altered such a way that, any cluster head node i closer to the base station is able to refuse to relay data packets after some time. This will allow cluster head node i to use its remaining energy up to T i to serve its own cluster as the cluster head, until all other cluster head nodes j too reach their residual energies to the corresponding T j s. This will ensure the residual energies of all cluster head nodes will reach their respective dynamic energy threshold values at the same time. In other words the expectation is
t t T Eres T Eres i = j i j
(i = j ) (i, j H).
Hence, a sharp edge eect of the lifetime curve can be achieved as explained in Section 2.4.3 Figure 2.5. The next step would be to identify the dynamic energy threshold value at which, a cluster head node i should refuse relaying any incoming packets. According to the EDCR t as a cluster MH algorithm, any cluster head node i expends energy (1 c) Eres i t=T head. Further, it has already shown that the cluster heads closest to the base station drain
T (> T ) for all the cluster heads i such energy faster. Hence, if it is possible to identify a i i
that, it stops forwarding any incoming relay packets which allow the cluster head i to serve only its cluster as a cluster head (not as a relay node for other cluster heads), while other cluster heads too function their role. This would enable to achieve even energy expenditure by all cluster heads irrespective of their location. Now, it can be dened,
T i = 1 a(1 c)
T i c
(6.9)
where, c and T i have their usual meanings and a [0, 1]. It should be noted that,
T E T . This is similar to the original EDCR algorithm, where Case 1 : As a 0, i resi
all cluster heads directly communicate with the base station.

T T . This is similar to the EDCR-MH algorithm, where all Case 2 : As a 1 , i i
cluster heads communicate with the base station through other cluster heads. 88
As stated before, initially all cluster heads would relay their data packets through the identied next-hop relay cluster head node. To clarify this further, Figure 6.6 can be used. According to this gure, the cluster head node (k 1) will relay its aggregated cluster data to cluster head node (k 2). Similarly, cluster head node (k 2) will relay its aggregated cluster data and the packets received from cluster head (k 1) to the next-hop cluster head (k 3). In a similar manner, cluster head node 1 will receive packets from all other cluster heads 2, 3, ..(k 1). It will forward these relay packets and its own aggregated data packet to the cluster head node 0. Cluster head node 0 will directly forward all incoming relay packets and its own cluster aggregated data packet to the base station. According to this, the energy expenditure per routine data gathering round by cluster head 0 is the highest. Cluster head node 1 will have the next highest energy expenditure per routine data gathering round. Likewise, cluster head (k 1) will have the least energy expenditure per routine data gathering round. If it is assumed that, t t t Eres = Eres = ... = Eres 0 t=T0 1 t=T0 (k1) t=T0 where, T0 is the moment the cluster heads were elected to their roles, then, using equations (6.8) and (6.9),
T0 T0 T0 0 = 1 = ... = ( k1) . T0 Note that cluster head 0 reaches its residual energy 0 rst. Once cluster head 0 residual T0 energy drops below 0 at time t = T0 + t0 it will refuse relaying any incoming relay
packets. This refusal is practically implemented by sending a negative acknowledgment packet (NAK ). Once cluster head 1 and any other cluster head which use cluster head 0 as the next-hop receives a NAK from cluster head 0, they will stop relaying packets through cluster head 0 and start to directly transmit their own packets and any incoming relay packets to the base station. After t = T0 + t0 , the energy usage of cluster head 0 is signicantly reduced as now it is not burdened with the relaying incoming packets. On the other hand the rate of energy consumption of cluster head 1 goes high as it has to directly reach the base station to transmit both its data and any incoming relay data. Hence, if t dEres i is dened as the energy depletion rate of cluster head node i in time interval [Tn ,Tn+1 ] dt [Tn , Tn+1 ] (where n = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...) then,
t t dEres dEres 0 0 << [ T ,T + t ] [T0 +t0 ,T1 ] 0 0 0 dt dt t t dEres dEres 1 1 << [ T + t ,T + t ] [T0 ,T0 +t0 ] 0 0 0 1 dt dt
89
T0 . As a where, t = T0 + t1 is the time at which cluster head 1 reaches its residual energy 1
result of well distributed clusters of the EDCR algorithm, dBS,CH0 dCH0 ,CH1 dCH1 ,CH2 .. dCH(k2) ,CH(k1) = DCH CH = 1.3493R where, dx,y refers to the distance between location x and y and DCH CH is given in equation (4.29). Hence,
t t dEres dEres (k1) 0 [ T + t ,T ] [T0 ,T0 +t(k2) ] 0 0 1 dt dt
where, time t = T0 + t(k2) is the moment at which cluster head (k 2) reaches its residual
T0 energy to ( k2) . In other words, until t = T0 + t(k2) cluster head node (k 1) will relay
its packets through cluster head (k 2). t0 < t1 < .. < t(k2) Accordingly, during the time T1 > t > T0 +t(k2) , where T1 is the next re-clustering moment, cluster head (k 1) has to reach the far end base station directly. Furthermore, all other cluster heads 0, 1, .., (k 2) too have to reach the base station directly and will only be transmitting their cluster aggregated data. Hence, the time interval T1 > t > T0 + t(k2) is identical to EDCR scenario. Further during this period
t t t dEres dEres dEres (k1) 0 1 > > ... > . dt dt dt
In other words, the energy dissipation rate of cluster heads that are located far away from the base station is higher compared to the cluster heads that are located closer to the base station during this period. The intention of this method is to ensure that all cluster head nodes i reach their
0 residual energies to T i at the same time. In other words, it is required to nd the times
that each cluster head 0, 1, .., (k 1) would act as a cluster head, until its energy depletes
0 to the corresponding T i . 0 , 1 , 2 , ..., (k1) can be dened as the time where each cluster
head 0, 1, 2, ..., (k 1) would perform its duties as a cluster head before reaching their
T0 0 corresponding T i . Note that, the i are all equal for the same initial energy.
For cluster head 0 t0 = T0 t 0 Eres 0 t=T0

t dEres 0 dt [T0 ,T0 +t0 ]
T0 0 T 0 0 0 = t0 + t dEres 0 dt [T0 +t0 ,T1 ]
90
Similarly for cluster head node 1

T0 1 t dEres 1 t Eres + t 0 1 t=T0 dt t dEres 1
t1 = t0 +
[T0 ,T0 +t0 ]
dt
[T0 +t0 ,T0 +t1 ]
1 = t1 +
T0 0 T 1 1 t dEres 1 dt [T0 +t1 ,T1 ]
And similarly for cluster head node 2

T0 2 t Eres | + t1 2 t=T0 t dEres 2 t dEres 2 dt
t2 = t1 +
[T0 ,T0 +t1 ]
dt
[T0 +t1 ,T0 +t2 ]
2 = t2 +
T0 0 T 2 2 t dEres 2 dt [T0 +t2 ,T1 ]
Then, by induction it can be inferred that for cluster head node (k 2) t dE res(k2) T0 t Eres ( | + t(k3) k2) (k2) t=T0 dt [T0 ,T0 +t(k3) ] t(k2) = t(k3) + t dEres(k2) dt
[T0 +t(k3) ,T0 +t(k2) ]
(k2) = t(k2) +
T0 0 T (k2) (k2) t dEres (k2)
dt
[T0 +t(k2) ,T1 ]
In the case of cluster head node (k 1), there is no necessity to forward other cluster heads data packets. Hence,
t 0 Eres T (k1) (k1)
t=T0
+ t(k2)
t dEres (k1)

[T0 ,T0 +t(k2) ]
dt
(k1) = t(k2) +
t dEres (k1)
dt
[T0 +t(k2) ,T1 ]
It is required to derive a suitable a, in order to ensure that, all cluster head nodes i deplete
0 their residual energies to T i at the same time (i.e. all i s are approximately equal). This
91
can be achieved heuristically by ensuring the two extreme cluster heads i.e. cluster head
T0 0 node 0 and (k 1) have equal time in which they reach T 0 and (k1) respectively. i.e.,
0 = (k1) The above analysis proves that the use of (6.9) with suitable a would make that the nodes located close to base station and those located far away would deplete their energy at the same rate. Ideally it should be ensured that all cluster heads deplete at the same rate irrespective of their location. Hence, considering 0 = 1 = 2 = ...i = ...k2 = k1 is more meaningful than only considering to realize 0 = k1 . In order to achieve this, it is necessary to have dierent ai for each cluster head node i that relay packets from other cluster heads beyond its location. Hence, equation (6.9) should be changed as follows.
T i = 1 ai (1 c)
T i c
(6.10)
Now, there are (k 1) dierent ai (i = 0, 1...k 2) variables and k 1 dierent equations (0 = 1 , 1 = 2 , ...k2 = k1 ) to be solved for a given wireless sensor network setup. It should be noted that, all ai for a given requirement can be pre-calculated. Hence, in a practical deployment strategy, it is possible to use a lookup table with a set of distinct ai values for each given range. For a circular wireless deployment region with radius r and cluster head broadcasting range R, it can have k = r/DCH CH levels where, DCH CH = 1.3493R as given in (4.29). If the above equations are solved, corresponding ai for each level can be found. The simulation experiment given in Section 7.7 demonstrate the use of above described methods in nding respective ai and its positive eect on the wireless sensor network lifetime.
6.2.1
Determination of Ropt and copt for EDCR-EB
The importance of determining the optimum values for the cluster head candidacy broadcasting radius R and cluster head role rotation trigger function parameter c of EDCR class of algorithms were discussed before. Further, analytical frameworks in determining Ropt and copt for EDCR algorithm were given in Section 5.1 and 5.2 respectively. Then the same frameworks were extended to suite the EDCR-MH algorithm in Section 6.1.2. In what follows, these techniques in determining Ropt and copt are extended for the applicability of EDCR-EB algorithm. EDCR-EB algorithm is a combination of EDCR and EDCR-MH algorithms. In EDCREB algorithm, any cluster head node starts its operations following EDCR-MH algorithm 92
and ends with EDCR algorithm as discussed in the previous section. Cluster heads close to the base station (According to Figure 6.6 they are in Region B. They are referred as tier 0 cluster heads.) operate relatively short time in EDCH-MH mode and rest in EDCR mode. On the other hand, cluster head nodes located far away from the base station (According to Figure 6.6 they are in Region A. They are referred as tier (k 1) assuming there are k dierent tiers.) operate most of time in EDCR-MH mode and rest in EDCR mode. Hence, it can be concluded that, as the cluster heads move away from the base station, the time they operate in EDCR mode reduces. In other words, the time they operate in EDCR-MH mode increase as the cluster heads move away from the base station. As a result, it is possible to state,
k1 k1
t
i=0
EDCR CHi
=
i=0
tEDCR-MH , CHi
where, t
EDCR CHi
and t
EDCR-MH CHi
represents the time a cluster head in tier i operated in EDCR
mode and EDCR-MH mode respectively. Therefore on average, it can be expected a cluster head to spend half of the time in EDCR-MH mode and rest in EDCR mode considering the entire sensor network. Eect of Ropt Ropt has already identied as the cluster head broadcasting range, R, which minimize the total energy consumption of collecting one bit of data from the entire sensor network in total any data gathering round (in Section 5.1). This energy consumption was dened as J in equation (5.9). total for EDCR mode by following Section 5.1. This will be It is possible to derive J total total for EDCR-MH by named as J = fEDCR (R). Similarly, it is possible to derive J EDCR total following Section 6.1.2. This will be referred as J = fEDCR-MH (R). It has already EDCR-MH identied that a cluster head would spend on average half of the data gathering rounds in EDCR-MH mode and rest in EDCR mode. Hence, to maximize the entire sensor network life, it is necessary to minimize total total total J =J +J = fEDCR-EB (R) EDCR-EB EDCR-MH EDCR A computer aided numerical technique can be used to nd the Ropt which will minimize total J . EDCR-EB
93
Eect of copt In Section 5.2, an analytical framework in nding copt for the EDCR algorithm was presented. Then this analysis was extended to determine the same for EDCR-MH algorithm in Section 6.1.2. The dierence in calculation of copt for EDCR and EDCR-MH diers due to the variation of total energy spent by a cluster head (ECH ). ECH can be calculated for EDCR and EDCR-MH using equation (5.16) and (6.7) respectively. As it has already discussed, it is possible to expect a cluster head to spend on average half of the time in EDCR-MH mode and rest in EDCR mode. Any cluster heads in and around the middle tier (k/2) would have the equal number of rounds in EDCR-MH mode and EDCR mode. Hence, when a middle tier (k/2) cluster is selected, ECH EDCR-EB should be used as the total energy spent by a cluster head in calculating copt in EDCR-EB. This will be given by, ECH EDCR-EB = ECH EDCR + ECH EDCR-MH , where, ECH EDCR and ECH EDCR-MH are identical to ECH of EDCR algorithm and EDCR-MH algorithm respectively. These are given in equations (5.16) and (6.7) respectively. An extension to EDCR and EDCR-MH algorithms named EDCR-EB was presented in this section. This realizes the global energy balancing of the entire wireless sensor network. Further, it was presented those suitable techniques in nding the optimum parameters ai , R and c of the EDCR-EB algorithm. The performance of the EDCR-EB algorithm will be evaluated using simulation experiments in Section 7.7. Next, brief guidelines in applying EDCR-EB algorithm are given.
6.2.2
Application Guidelines of EDCR-EB Algorithm
EDCR-EB algorithm was described as an extension to the EDCR and EDCR-MH algorithms. The steps of EDCR-EB algorithm is briey described below. It should be noted that, there are no changes to the methods used for cluster head selection, rotation of the cluster head role and periodic data gathering from member nodes to the respective cluster heads compared to the EDCR algorithm. Further, the identication of next hop cluster head nodes for multi-hop data relaying to base station is identical to EDCR-MH algorithm. 1 Cluster head candidacy : A nodes with highest residual energy in a given neighborhood with radius R becomes a cluster head. At this moment, all cluster head nodes
T i calculates T i and i .
94
2 Cluster head selection and cluster formation : All the nodes that do not become cluster heads, select the closest cluster head with most residual energy as its cluster head. Then, these nodes register with their corresponding cluster heads. The cluster head prepares a TDMA schedule for periodic data transmission and inform its members. During this time, all cluster heads identify the next-hop node (a neighboring cluster head or the base station) to send its own packets or to forward any incoming relay packets. 3 Periodic data transmission : All regular nodes periodically wake up and send their sensor data to the respective cluster heads. Once the cluster head receives all the data packets from its member nodes, it aggregates the received data and sends the aggregated data packet to the base station through its next-hop relay node or directly depending on the following circumstances.
t T of a cluster head i (who is facilitating data relaying to others cluster When Eres < i i
heads) gets an incoming relay packet, it issues a NAK. When a cluster head receives a NAK from its next-hop, it stops seeking next-hop cluster heads assistance in relaying its data and any incoming packets and starts to transmit to the base station directly from that moment onwards. 4 Cluster head role rotation : If any cluster head node i nds that its residual energy has dropped below the threshold value T i , it informs the base station about this. Base station initiates a new cluster setup phase, in which, existing cluster heads nd the maximum residual energy of their neighbors and broadcast it to the neighboring cluster heads. All cluster heads use this information to compute the maximum residual energy in their second degree neighborhood and update their existing members. All nodes use this value to calculate their relative energy level in the neighborhood. The proposed EDCR-EB algorithm is an extension to the EDCR algorithm. Hence, EDCR-EB inherits the ecient local energy balancing through residual energy based cluster head role selection and rotation. Further, the hybrid cluster head to base station communication strategy (combination of multi-hop and single-hop communication) realize the global energy balancing irrespective of the location of nodes. Hence, EDCR-EB achieves the desired lifetime curve for any dimension of a wireless sensor network.
95
CHAPTER 7
Simulation Results
A new class of energy aware distributed clustering algorithms named EDCR, which selforganize large ad-hoc deployed wireless sensor network for periodic data collection from the environment to a distinct base station, was presented in this research. Subsequently, the research has analytically proven the performance of the algorithm and shown the algorithm has met its objectives. Further, analytical techniques in nding the optimum algorithm parameters that maximize the sensor network lifetime were given. In what follows, the results of the simulation experiments carried out to evaluate the EDCR class of algorithms using MATLAB R technical computation platform is presented. The performance of the EDCR algorithm in terms of the sensor network lifetime, compared with the existing algorithms of similar class such as LEACH, HEED, SEP and ANTCLUST, is evaluated rst in these simulation experiments. Further, these simulation experiments evaluate the cluster distribution and cluster head location in a given cluster, in line with expectations of the EDCR algorithm. Then, the performance of EDCR when the sensor network deployment area is not a rectangle is evaluated. Subsequently, the accuracy of the proposed analytical framework for determining the algorithm parameter R for a given sensor network with required number of clusters is evaluated in these simulation experiments. Similarly, the accuracy of determining Ropt and copt of the EDCR algorithm in maximizing the network lifetime, is evaluated using simulation experiments. Finally, these simulation experiments evaluate the performance of proposed extensions of EDCR algorithm to realize the global energy balancing, using multi-hop communication between cluster heads to base station, over a cluster head overlay.
96
7.1
Comparison of Performance of EDCR Algorithm with Similar Class of Algorithms
Existing literature on energy aware distributed clustering algorithms for wireless sensor networks have tested their performance using computer simulation experiments under free space communication model (FS) or simplied multi-path fading communication model (MF). Initially, the performance of LEACH algorithm was evaluated under the free space communication model in [19]. Then the same model was used in simulation experiments of LEACH-D algorithm and ANTCLUST algorithm in [22] and [26] respectively. However, later the performance of LEACH algorithm was tested under the simplied multi-path fading communication model in [20]. This was then followed by [24] and [27] in the evaluation of SEP and HEED algorithms respectively. Hence, EDCR algorithm performance was tested under free space communication model and simplied multi-path fading communication model in simulation experiments for better comparison. For these simulation experiments, a rectangular wireless sensor network deployment region will be considered. Further, two distinct base station locations are considered. In the rst category, the base station is placed at the center of the area being monitored. Placement of the base station at the centre of the deployment region allows to obtain the maximum lifetime for sensor network since it makes the average distance between a sensor node and base station a minimum. Further, the actual distance of nodes from the base station are evenly distributed around this average. However, there are instances where the base station cannot be located at the center of the sensor bed. In such a scenario, the average distance to a sensor node would be skewed and as a result, the network lifetime would be reduced. The second category covers this scenario. The typical energy capacity of a battery equipped with a sensor node is much more than the values used in the simulation experiments. The reason behind use of much small battery energy level in simulation experiments is reducing the time taken to complete the simulation experiment. Further, it should be noted that, this does not eect on the nal conclusion based on the simulation experiment results. Even other researchers of similar classes of algorithms have used scale down battery energy values in their simulation experiments due to the same reason. Further, the research has neglected the complexities in associated with the underline wireless sensor network MAC protocols in these simulations, as it does not have an eect on the evaluation of the proposed EDCR algorithm compared with the rest of the algorithms of the same class. Further, perfect data compressibility is assumed in
97
these simulation experiments, as the same was assumed with the simulation experiments of similar class of algorithms such as LEACH, HEED, SEP and ANTCLUST.
7.1.1
Results for the Free Space Model
The research presents the lifetime comparison of EDCR algorithm with some of similar class of distributed clustering algorithms found in existing literature which have tested their performance in free space communication model. Hence, the research has considered LEACH, SEP and ANTCLUST algorithms for this comparison. The main reason for restricting with these algorithms (out of all similar class of algorithms) for direct comparisons is that some of them has been used as the base line for comparison in existing literature and resource/time constraint in coding all such available algorithms. Following wireless sensor network deployment cases are considered in this comparison. Case FS1: Homogeneous wireless sensor network of 200 nodes each with 0.5 J energy, randomly deployed in a 100 100 region1 with base station located at (50,50). One corner of the rectangular deployment area is considered as (0,0). Case FS2: Homogeneous wireless sensor network of 200 nodes each with 0.5 J energy, randomly deployed in a 100 100 region with base station located at (50,150). One corner of the rectangular deployment area is considered as (0,0). Case FS3: Heterogeneous wireless sensor network of 200 nodes with randomly assigned energies 0.3 J to 0.8 J, randomly deployed in a 100 100 region with base station located at (50,50). One corner of the rectangular deployment area is considered as (0,0). Case FS4: Heterogeneous wireless sensor network of 200 nodes with energies randomly assigned 0.3 J to 0.8 J, randomly deployed in a 100 100 region with base station located at (50,150). One corner of the rectangular deployment area is considered as (0,0). Note : FS1 and FS2 are situations where applying EDCR for a new wireless sensor network with identical nodes. On the other hand, FS3 and FS4 are situations where applying EDCR algorithm for an existing wireless sensor network possibly with some new nodes to replace malfunctioning nodes. FS1 and FS3 are scenarios where base station is at the center of the area under monitor. FS2 and FS4 demonstrate a situation where it is not possible to set
1
All distances considered in these simulations are in meters (m).
98
up the base station at the center of the area under monitoring. As a result the only option is to set up the base station far away from the area of interest. The research has set Eelec at 50 nJ/bit,
amp
at 100 pJ/bit/m2 and EDA at 5 nJ/bit/message.
Advertisement or setup packets were chosen 60 bits in length and normal data packets were chosen to be 2000 bits in length. These values have been chosen in consistent with the previous research of similar class such as [19] and [26]. For simulation purposes, it has set that LEACH and SEP having on average 5% and 2.5% nodes as cluster heads respectively for scenario where base station was at (50,50) and (50,150). EDCR and ANTCLUST is assumed to have a broadcasting radius of 25 and 37 respectively for scenario where base station was at (50,50) and (50,150). This is in line with the set point of average number of cluster heads of LEACH and SEP. Additionally, for the ANTCLUST algorithm, it has set that the percentage of social sensor nodes as 10% and the broadcasting radius for meetings as 15 and 18 for base station locations (50,50) and (50,150) respectively. Further, EDCR algorithm cluster head rotation trigger calculation parameter c was set to 0.7. Remark : Note that, SEP algorithm assumes two types of energy nodes. Hence, it cannot be considered in a strict homogeneous network. On the other hand it cannot be also considered in a heterogeneous network where random energies are assigned to nodes. To overcome this issue, the research considered SEP in a homogeneous network where there are 20% of nodes having 4 times (0.5 J 4 = 2 J) of battery energy than the rest (0.5 J). The lifetime comparison based on the simulation results of EDCR, LEACH, SEP and ANTCLUST on above explained sensor networks are shown in Figure 7.1 - 7.4. Figure 7.1 compares the lifetime curves of EDCR, ANTCLUST, LEACH and SEP algorithms when applied to the network deployment given in Case FS1. This clearly indicates that the performance of EDCR algorithm is better than the rest in terms of FND and PNA matrices. The performance of EDCR is 21% better than the 2nd best i.e. ANTCLUST with respect to PNA(95%) measurement. Further EDCR is 30% better than LEACH on the same measurement. This gain of EDCR algorithm is as a result of its energy based cluster head selection and rotation and low energy overhead in the cluster management process. Similarly, Figure 7.2 compares the lifetime curves of EDCR, ANTCLUST, LEACH and SEP algorithms when applied to the network deployment given in Case FS2. The dierence between FS1 and FS2 is that the base station is now being placed outside the area being monitored resulting longer distance for cluster heads to reach the base station. This again,
99
200 EDCR SEP LEACH ANTCLUST
Number of Live Sensor Nodes
150
100
50
1000
2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Number of Data Transmission Rounds
7000
Figure 7.1: Number of Live Nodes vs. Data Transmission Rounds for the simulation experiments using free space communication model - FS1
clearly indicates that the performance of EDCR algorithm is better than the rest in terms of FND and PNA matrices. The performance of EDCR is 31% better than the 2nd best i.e. ANTCLUST with respect to PNA(95%) measurement. Further, EDCR is 42% better than LEACH on the same measurement. Figure 7.2 reconrms the better performance of EDCR compared to rest. Further, it should be noted that the performance gap between EDCR and other algorithms has widen compared to Figure 7.1 due to EDCR algorithm less over head , high accuracy and consistency in producing the required number of cluster heads. Figure 7.3 and Figure 7.4 demonstrate the performance of EDCR compared with LEACH and ANTCLUST in a heterogeneous energy sensor network for Case FS3 and FS4. FS3 is the heterogeneous condition of FS1 and FS4 is that of FS2. Figure 7.3 indicates the performance of EDCR with respect to PNA (95%) lifetime measurement is 18% and 34% better than ANTCLUST and LEACH respectively for the condition given in FS3. Similarly, Figure 7.4 points out that EDCR algorithm lifetime performance with respect to PNA (95%) measurement is 32% and 42% better than ANTCLUST and LEACH respectively for the condition given in FS4. These results clearly indicate that the energy based cluster head selection and rotation of EDCR algorithm has given a clear advantage in heterogeneous energy sensor networks. Hence, EDCR is a good match for sensor networks with irregular trac patterns and hybrid energy networks which would cause irregular node energy dissipation.
100
200 EDCR SEP LEACH ANTCLUST
150
100
50
500
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 Number of Data Transmission rounds
4000
4500
200 EDCR LEACH ANTCLUST 150
100
50
1000 2000 3000 4000 Number of Data Transmission Rounds
5000
101
200 EDCR LEACH ANTCLUST 150
100
50
500
3500
4000
102
The summary of the lifetime performance measurement with respect to FND, PNA (95% and 90%) and LND matrices of results shown in Figure 7.1 - 7.4 are tabulated in Table 7.1. These results conrm the performance of EDCR algorithm is better than LEACH, ANTCLUST and SEP algorithms in terms of 95% and 90% PNA measurement. Table 7.1: Summary of results for the free space model (Unit: Number of data transmission rounds) FND FS1 EDCR LEACH SEP ANTCLUST FS2 EDCR LEACH SEP ANTCLUST FS3 EDCR LEACH ANTCLUST FS4 EDCR LEACH ANTCLUST 1252 1140 1290 1380 749 430 630 520 1513 880 1340 719 600 450 PNA(95%) 1803 1390 1570 1490 1190 840 760 910 1758 1310 1490 1125 790 850 PNA(90%) 1823 1430 1660 1540 1261 920 930 1020 1816 1370 1600 1208 840 980 LND 2127 2450 6360 3600 1721 1340 3530 2140 2111 1980 3130 1734 1280 2040
103
7.1.2
Results for the Simplied Multi-path Fading Model
The simplied multi-path fading communication model assumes a d2 model (free space model) for distances less than d0 (= 87 m) and a d4 model (multi-path fading) for distance greater than d0 . Typically, the intra cluster communication would follow the d2 model where as the cluster head to base station communication would follow the d4 model. Hence, to ensure that both these communication models are evaluated during the simulation, the research has considered scenarios where the base station is located far away out of the sensor deployment area. Following four cases are chosen to evaluate the eectiveness of the proposed EDCR algorithm under the simplied multi-path fading model. Case MF1: Homogeneous wireless sensor network of 200 nodes, each with 0.5 J energy, randomly deployed in a 100 100 region with base station located at (50,150). One corner of the rectangular deployment area is considered as (0,0). Case MF2: Heterogeneous wireless sensor network of 200 nodes with randomly assigned energies 0.3 J to 0.8 J, randomly deployed in a 100 100 region with base station located at (50,150). One corner of the rectangular deployment area is considered as (0,0). Case MF3: Homogeneous wireless sensor network of 400 nodes, each with 0.5 J energy, randomly deployed in a 200 100 region with base station located at (100,200). One corner of the rectangular deployment area is considered as (0,0). Case MF4: Heterogeneous wireless sensor network of 400 nodes with randomly assigned energies 0.3 J to 0.8 J, randomly deployed in a 200 100 region with base station located at (100,200). One corner of the rectangular deployment area is considered as (0,0). Note : MF1 and MF3 are situations where applying EDCR to a new wireless sensor network with identical nodes. Rest of the situations demonstrate applying EDCR algorithm to an existing sensor network possibly with some new nodes to replace malfunctioning nodes. All of the above scenarios demonstrate a situation where it is not possible to set up the base station at the center of the area under monitoring. So the only option is to set up the base station away from the area of interested. For simplied multi-path fading model simulation experiments, it has set Eelec at 50 nJ/bit,
ampmp
at 0.0013 pJ/bit/m4 ,
ampf s
at 10 pJ/bit/m2 and EDA at 5 nJ/bit/message
104
as same as in [20], [24] and [27]. Advertisement or set up packets were 60 bits in length and normal data packets were 2000 bits in length as same as in the simulation experiments of free space model. Figures 7.5 - 7.8 show number of sensor nodes remaining alive vs the number of data transmission rounds for the above described scenarios (Case MP1 - MP4). The results of the proposed EDCR algorithm were compared with LEACH, HEED, ANTCLUST and SEP in homogeneous network scenarios. However, it was not possible to use SEP algorithm in a random heterogeneous network as it expects two distinct types of energy nodes at the beginning of the algorithm and no way to use random homogeneous nodes. This simulation experiments used 0.2 as the extra energy node fraction and each of the extra energy nodes had 4 times energy than a normal node. For experiment purposes, the research set LEACH and SEP to produce on average 3% and 1.5% of cluster heads respectively for scenarios where the base station was at (50,150) and (100,200). ANTCLUST, HEED and EDCR had broadcasting radius of 40 and 55 respectively for scenarios where the base station was at (50,150) and (100,200) in line with LEACH and SEP. The parameter c was set at 0.7 when calculating the i of EDCR. On average 10% of nodes become social sensor nodes in ANTCLUST and had a meeting range of 20 and 25 respectively for scenarios where the base station was at (50,150) and (100,200).
200 HEED EDCR ANTCLUST LEACH SEP
150
100
50
500
3500
4000
Figure 7.5: Number of Live Nodes vs. Data Transmission Rounds for the simulation experiments using simplied multi-path fading communication model - MF1 Figure 7.5 compares the lifetime curves of EDCR, ANTCLUST, LEACH, HEED and 105
SEP algorithms when applied to the network deployment given in Case MF1. This clearly indicates that the performance of EDCR algorithm is better than the rest in terms of FND and PNA matrices. The performance of EDCR is 13% better than the 2nd best i.e. ANTCLUST with respect to PNA(95%) measurement. Further, EDCR is 120% better than LEACH on the same measurement. The reason for such a signicantly better performance of EDCR compared to LEACH is its less overhead and fairly consistent number of cluster heads being produced. On the other hand, overhead of LEACH is high due to the requirement to cover its cluster head candidacy message to entire sensor network and it consumes signicant amount of energy due to d4 path loss. Further, number of cluster heads produce by LEACH signicantly varies around the expected number. This again causes signicant performances degrade of LEACH.
200 HEED EDCR ANTCLUST LEACH
150
100
50
500
3500
4000
Figure 7.6: Number of Live Nodes vs. Data Transmission Rounds for the simulation experiments using simplied multi-path fading communication model - MF2
Figure 7.6 compares the lifetime curves of EDCR, ANTCLUST, LEACH and HEED algorithms when applied to the network deployment given in Case MF2. MF2 is the heterogeneous case of MF1. This gure clearly indicates that the lifetime performance of EDCR algorithm is better than the other algorithms. The performance of EDCR is 32% better than the 2nd best i.e. ANTCLUST with respect to PNA(95%) measurement. The gap between EDCR and 2nd best ANTCLUST has widened compared to Case MF1. This is due to the fact that EDCR follows energy driven cluster head role rotation where as ANTCLUST follows predetermined xed time based cluster head rotation. These results conrm the 106
robustness of EDCR algorithm compared to other algorithms due to the residual energy awareness of it.
400 350 Number of Live sensor nodes 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 HEED EDCR ANTCLUST LEACH SEP
500
3500
4000
Figure 7.7: Number of Live Nodes vs. Data Transmission Rounds for the simulation experiments using simplied multi-path fading communication model - MF3
Similarly, Figure 7.7 and Figure 7.8 indicate the lifetime performance of EDCR is 43% and 38% better than the 2nd best ANTCLUST algorithm due to lesser energy overhead and energy based cluster head selection and rotation method. The summary of the lifetime performance measurement with respect to FND, PNA (95% and 90% of nodes alive) and LND matrices of the results shown in Figures 7.5 - 7.8, are tabulated in Table 7.2. The simulation results of EDCR algorithm lifetime performance compared with similar class of algorithms such as LEACH, HEED, SEP and ANTCLUST were given above in Figures 7.1 - 7.8 and their summary tabulated in the Table 7.1 and 7.2 illustrate that EDCR algorithm has outperformed existing algorithms of same class in both homogeneous and heterogeneous wireless sensor network scenarios under the simplied multi-path fading communication model as same as the free space communication model with respect to the performance metrics FND and PNA (with 95% and 90% nodes alive). The reasons for the EDCR algorithm to perform better than the others can be highlighted as low overhead, consistent number of well distributed cluster heads and energy based cluster head selection and rotation facilitating a perfect local energy balancing. In simplied multi-path fading model, the required energy to reach a node or base station over a distance, d > d0 (= 87 m) 107
400 350
300 250 200 150 100 50 0
HEED EDCR ANTCLUST LEACH
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
Number of Data Transmission Rounds
Figure 7.8: Number of Live Nodes vs. Data Transmission Rounds for the simulation experiments using simplied multi-path fading communication model - MF4 is proportional to d4 . On the other hand, in the free space model it is proportional to d2 irrespective of the distance. Hence, under the simplied multi-path fading model, algorithms with large overhead have much adverse performance especially when the communication distances are over d0 . As it has shown in the analysis of this research, the EDCR algorithm has very minimal overhead compared to other algorithms. Hence, the performance of the EDCR algorithm is much better compared with other algorithms under the simplied multipath fading model. This is why overall results of Table 7.2 is more positive for EDCR than the overall results of Table 7.1. Further, it should be highlighted that the performance of EDCR algorithm is more than 30% of LEACH algorithm for any of the case representing free space model (FS1 - FS4). Furthermore, the performance of EDCR is always 120% better than LEACH for the cases representing simplied multi-path fading model (MF1 MF4). Hence, it can be deduced that the performance of EDCR is better than LEACH-D, EDAC and MEDIC too since these algorithms performances are only 25%, 10% and 25% better than LEACH respectively as quoted in Section 2.2 2 .
Remark : The presented simulation results illustrate that the lifetime performance of LEACH algorithm is better than that of HEED algorithm. However in past this has confused some readers, as HEED algorithm was published much later than LEACH algorithm.
The reason for not presenting the direct simulation comparison of EDCR with LEACH-D, EDAC and MEDIC was the unavailability of the exact pseudo code of these algorithms to the researcher.
2
108
Table 7.2: Summary of results for the multi-path fading model (Unit: Number of data transmission rounds) FND MF1 EDCR SEP ANTCLUST LEACH HEED MF2 EDCR ANTCLUST LEACH HEED MF3 EDCR SEP ANTCLUST LEACH HEED MF4 EDCR ANTCLUST LEACH HEED 1485 610 1070 740 240 984 840 670 270 717 80 350 130 10 1571 940 120 60 PNA(95%) 1861 830 1640 840 320 2097 1590 840 410 1698 120 1190 200 40 1767 1280 220 90 PNA(90%) 1901 1020 1740 880 430 2111 1780 1010 480 1868 170 1320 250 90 2001 1400 270 100 LND 2007 6070 3540 3390 2020 2314 4080 4370 2300 2221 3080 2850 1460 610 2481 3640 2370 740
The confusion has arisen due to the comparison of HEED with a variant of LEACH named gen-LEACH. The authors of HEED has accepted this fact in [27] with their own words HEED expends less energy in clustering than gen-LEACH, because gen-LEACH propagates residual energy information. It is also worth mentioning that we found that the original LEACH protocol expends less energy in clustering and produces longer lifetime than both HEED and gen-LEACH when used specically for the application described .... It should be noted that this research has considered LEACH but not gen-LEACH for the comparison purpose in its simulation experiments.
109
7.2
Cluster Distribution and Cluster Head Location in a Cluster
One of the design objectives of the EDCR algorithm was to produce well distributed clusters and their corresponding cluster heads to be located close to the center of the cluster area. In order to test the correctness of this, an arbitrary wireless sensor network setup of 200 nodes randomly distributed in an area 250 175 with the base station located at the center is selected. Further, it is selected that R = 40. Simulation experiments were conducted well over 100 times to observe the cluster setup after dierent data transmission rounds. Figure 7.9 gives such a typical representation of the cluster setup after 200 data transmission rounds. This demonstrates that, the EDCR algorithm produces fairly balanced well distributed clusters, where cluster heads are located close to the centre of the corresponding cluster. There are 18 clusters at this instance. This is well acceptable, compared with the expected average number of clusters 16.8 derived using equation (4.24) of Section 4.2. Further, it can be derived that the expected average number of nodes per cluster as 11.8 using same equation. Actual node distribution among dierent clusters of the wireless sensor network setup given in Figure 7.9 is tabulated in Table 7.3.
10 13 13 8 12 17 9 9
13 10 10 7 14 11 11
13
12
Figure 7.9: Node distribution among all clusters
Table 7.3: Distribution of member nodes among dierent clusters No Of Members No Of Clusters 7 1 8 2 9 2 110 10 3 11 2 12 2 13 4 14 1 17 1
The distribution of nodes among dierent clusters of this incidence has a mean of 11.1, standard deviation of 2.5 and a median of 11. Further, this tabulation shows that 13 out of 18 clusters have member nodes 11 2. This demonstrates that the EDCR algorithm produces well distributed even size clusters at any given moment.
7.3
Applicability of EDCR algorithm in Non Rectangular Deployment Regions
To this point, simulation experiments have compared the performance of the EDCR algorithm with similar class of algorithms using rectangular wireless sensor network deployment regions. Based on these comparisons, it is found that the EDCR algorithm has better performance compared to other algorithms. Now simulation experiments test the applicability of EDCR algorithm to wireless sensor networks with non rectangular deployment regions. Following three cases are used for the demonstration purpose. Case NR1: 300 nodes, each with 0.5 J battery energy are uniform randomly deployed in a circular wireless sensor network deployment region with radius 100. The base station is located at the centre of the region. Algorithm parameters are set as R = 39 and c = 0.8. Case NR2: 334 nodes, each with 0.5 J battery energy are uniform randomly deployed in an area given by Area x 0 & y 0 & x 200 & y 200 & x2 + y 2 220 Area (x 150 & y 0 & x 200 & y 50). Base station is located at the (100,100) point. Algorithm parameters are set as R = 39 and c = 0.8. Case NR3: 371 nodes each with 0.5 J battery energy are uniform randomly deployed in a area given by Area (Square with vertexes (0, 0), (200, 0), (200, 200), (0, 200)) Area (Quadrilateral with vertexes (50, 50), (100, 55), (110, 100), (45, 100)). Base station is located at the (100,100) point. Algorithm parameters are set as R = 39 and c = 0.8. Figures 7.10, 7.11 and 7.12 illustrate a snap shot of cluster setup after 500 data transmission rounds and lifetime curve of the sensor network with EDCR algorithm for Case NR1,Case NR2 and Case NR3 respectively. According to these test results, it can be concluded that 111
(a) Snap Shot of Clusters
300
250 Number of Live Sensor Nodes
200
150
100
50
500

(b) Lifetime Curve
3500
4000
Figure 7.10: EDCR performance under Case NR1
112
350 300 Number of Live Sensor Nodes 250 200 150 100 50 0
500

(b) Lifetime Curve
3500
4000
113
400 350 Number of Live Sensor Nodes 300 250 200 150 100 50 0
500

(b) Lifetime Curve
3500
4000
114
the EDCR algorithm performs equally well with sensor network deployment regions of non rectangular and irregular shapes.
7.4
Accuracy of the Analytical Framework Proposed in Finding R for an Expected Cluster Setup
The accuracy of the analytical framework presented in Section 4.2, in deriving the cluster head broadcasting range R and expected distance between neighboring cluster heads DCH CH , will be evaluated using some hypothetical sensor network deployment requirements in this section. For this evaluation, 15 dierent hypothetical deployment requirements listed in Table 7.4 are considered. These 15 dierent cases are selected to test the applicability of the analytical method with square, rectangular and circular deployment regions, applicability with dierent expected number of clusters for a given deployment region and applicability of dierent expected number of nodes in a given cluster for a xed expected number of clusters. First column of this table gives a unique Case number for each scenario. This will be used to link the tabulated test results of Table 7.5 for each of these node deployment requirements. The column given under the heading Area presents the shape and size of the wireless sensor nodes deployed region (e.g. a b for rectangular region with sides a and b; r2 for circular region with radius r), while rest of the columns represents expected number of clusters E [k ], expected number of nodes in a cluster E [n] and the total number of nodes to be deployed in the region N (= E [k ] E [n]). Further, last column presents the calculated R for each case using either equation (4.25) or (4.27) depending on the network deployment region is a rectangular one or circular one respectively. Based on the analysis in Section 4.2, if the EDCR algorithm used with appropriate R, calculated using equation (4.25) or (4.27) for a given sensor network setup, it is possible to expect the average number of clusters actually produced by EDCR algorithm to be same as the required number at the design stage. In order to verify this, the results of the EDCR algorithm applied to sensor network setups given in Table 7.4 are tabulated in Table 7.5. The Table 7.5 has tabulated the average and standard deviation (AV SD) of actual number of clusters observed with many dierent random sensor network setups corresponding to each Case. The data tabulated in the column Beginning and End corresponding to the number of clusters setup at the beginning of a fresh set of homogeneous energy nodes and the number of clusters setup almost close to the end of life (95% nodes alive is used as the sensor network lifetime measurement matrix) respectively. The number of clusters half
115
Table 7.4: Sample network deployment requirements for EDCR Case 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Area 100 100 100 100 150 100 125 100 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 2002 2002 3002 3002 E [k ] 20 30 30 40 40 30 30 30 30 30 10 40 20 20 30 E [n] 20 20 20 25 20 40 25 20 15 10 30 15 15 20 30 N 400 600 600 1000 800 1200 750 600 450 300 300 600 300 400 900 R 19.42 15.57 19.11 14.93 26.70 31.15 31.15 31.15 31.15 31.15 57.42 47.04 68.24 102.37 82.24
way between Beginning and End is tabulated in the column Middle. Further, overall combined results of actual number of clusters of Beginning, Middle and End is given in the Overall column. Based on the simulation results, it can be justied that, the analytical technique presented in Section 4.2 to derive the appropriate algorithm parameter R to realize a required number of clusters in any given sensor eld is well applicable. Hence, it is possible to use the equation (4.25) or (4.27), at the design stage to calculate R of the EDCR class of algorithms, to realize the required number of clusters in any sensor network setup. The proposed analytical technique can be used in determining the desired number of clusters of the EDCR algorithm provided the application requires to have a considerable number of nodes in an expected cluster, i.e. R2 >> 1. In order to identify a bottom threshold for R2 or expected number of nodes in an average cluster (E [n]) for a given application requirement, the graphs given in Figure 7.13 and Figure 7.14 will be followed. These two graphs present the test results of Average number of actual clusters, E [k ]A vs Dierent Node Densities, for dierent cluster head broadcasting ranges, R of the EDCR algorithm applied for 200 200m2 square area of deployment and a circular area of radius 100m respectively. These two graphs have plotted curves for R = 25, 30, 35, 40 and 45. According to the simulation results E [k ]A vs curves are asymptotically (approximately) equal to the expected number of clusters, E [k ] calculated using equation (4.25) or (4.27). E [k ] corresponding to each R is marked in a dotted line. The vertical solid error bars 116
Table 7.5: Comparison of actual average number of clusters and expected value of it for EDCR algorithm Case 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 E [k ] 20 30 30 40 40 30 30 30 30 30 10 40 20 20 30 Beginning 19.6 1.5 30.2 1.6 29.3 2.0 39.8 2.0 39.2 1.9 30.9 1.6 30.4 1.8 29.8 1.5 28.8 1.2 27.3 1.4 9.8 0.9 38.2 1.6 19.1 0.7 20.5 1.5 30.2 1.1 Middle 20.3 29.5 30.3 39.6 41.0 31.1 30.9 30.3 28.3 28.0 11.0 39.6 19.7 20.7 33.1 0.9 1.1 1.0 1.1 0.9 1.7 1.6 1.1 1.7 2.8 0.8 1.5 1.4 0.9 1.1 End 20.4 30.7 30.2 41.6 40.8 32.1 31.0 30.5 28.5 28.3 10.5 39.5 17.9 18.9 32.5 0.8 1.3 1.6 1.1 1.4 1.2 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.4 0.9 1.7 1.2 1.6 1.0 Overall 20.1 30.1 29.9 40.3 40.3 31.3 30.8 30.2 28.5 27.8 10.4 39.1 18.9 20.0 31.9 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.7 1.4 1.4 2.0 1.0 1.7 1.3 1.5 1.6
marked on each of E [k ] shows the 5% (short one) and 10% (long one) levels below the E [k ] when R2 is 30 and 20 respectively. Further, it has found that 0.5018 fraction of nodes belonging to any given cluster heads broadcasting range R neighborhood (M ) to join its cluster, in the analysis presented in Section 4.2. Hence, it can be conrmed that the proposed technique can be used with EDCR class of algorithms in nding R for a given requirement E [k ] with maximum error of 10% where expected number of nodes in a cluster is above 10.
117
E[k] Vs for 200 x 200 sqare area of deployment

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 R = 25 R = 30 R = 35 R = 40 R = 45 E[k] 0 0.005 0.01 0.015
Average number of clusters. E[k]
Deployment node density,
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
Figure 7.13: E [k ]A vs for dierent R - 200 200m2 square deployment area
40
E[k] Vs for radius 100 circular area of deployment
35
A
Average number of clusters. E[k]
30
25
20
15
10
R = 25 R = 30 R = 35 R = 40 R = 45 E[k] 0 0.01 0.02
Deployment node density,
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
Figure 7.14: E [k ]A vs for dierent R - 100m radius circular deployment area
118
The value of knowing the average distance between neighboring cluster heads, DCH CH in calculating the expected energy budget in multi-hop communication between cluster heads and base station and calculating the optimum parameters of the EDCR-MH and EDCR-EB algorithms were discussed in Chapter 6. Hence, a formula to estimate DCH CH was derived in Section 4.2.6. In order to evaluate the validity of this formula in determining DCH CH , simulation experiments were carried out with dierent R values of EDCR algorithm for dierent sensor network deployment requirements. Based on these experiments, the measured average values of inter neighboring cluster head distance of all the sample Cases given in Table 7.4 were tabulated in Table 7.6 along with the estimated values using equation (4.29). The names of column headings Beginning, Middle, End and Overall are same as previous descriptions. These test results justify that the analytical formula derived for DCH CH is a good approximation for the calculation of energy budget and determining the algorithm parameters for EDCR-MH and EDCR-EB algorithms. Table 7.6: Comparison of actual average neighbor cluster head distance and theoretically expected value, DCH CH Case 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 DCH CH 26.5 21.2 26.1 20.3 36.4 42.5 42.5 42.5 42.5 42.5 76.4 63.4 92.1 138.1 110.9 Beginning 24.3 0.7 19.9 0.3 24.5 0.5 19.2 2.2 34.6 0.4 39.0 0.5 39.8 0.7 40.0 0.6 40.2 0.6 40.8 0.9 69.1 2.5 62.2 0.5 87.1 2.8 132.7 2.2 105.6 1.7 Middle 24.3 0.5 20.0 0.4 24.3 0.3 19.1 0.2 34.6 0.4 39.2 0.6 39.8 0.5 39.3 0.5 39.6 0.8 40.7 0.4 67.5 2.6 61.8 1.41 87.4 1.61 130.1 2.81 105.0 1.26 End 24.4 0.8 19.8 0.4 24.4 0.2 19.1 0.2 34.7 0.7 38.8 1.0 39.2 0.8 39.5 0.6 40.1 0.4 41.0 0.6 68.3 3.6 62.7 0.9 87.4 1.8 133.6 2.4 108.1 2.1 Overall 24.3 0.6 19.9 0.4 24.4 0.3 19.1 0.2 34.6 0.5 39.0 0.7 39.6 0.7 39.6 0.6 40.0 0.7 40.8 0.6 68.3 2.9 62.28 1.0 87.32 2.0 132.2 2.8 106.3 2.1
Based on the simulation experiment results presented in this section, it is veried that the applicability of the analytical method proposed for deriving R and DCH CH . Hence, the proposed analytical techniques are very useful in planning a wireless sensor network before deployment.
119
7.5
Validation of the Analytical Techniques for Determining the EDCR Algorithm Parameters for Maximizing the Network Lifetime
This section validates the analytical techniques presented in Section 5.1 and Section 5.2 respectively for determining EDCR algorithm parameters Ropt and copt that would maximize the lifetime of the sensor network.
7.5.1
Validation of Ropt
The analytical framework specied in Section 5.1 in nding Ropt is validated using simulation experiments in this section. This validation uses the design level requirements as described below. It is assumed that the compressibility of data generated in two adjoining neighboring is given by . Further, it is assumed that the nodes, placed at an average distance of D system follows exponential data correlation model with parameter =
ln(1 ) D
. Same
time, it is possible to nd the required number of nodes (N ) to be deployed using N = 2 ) 3 . The results of this simulation experiment is tabulated in Table 7.7. The rst A/(4D column under the name Region gives the deployment area dimensions and base station location (e.g. 2502 (c) for a circular deployment area with base station at the centre and 250 200 (p) for a rectangular deployment area with base station on the centre of , , , N and Ropt have usual longer side of the perimeter). The column names given by D meanings. The nal column L gives the % dierence of the life time of the wireless sensor network when used the R = Ropt and any R gives the maximum lifetime measurement. This is calculated using simulation results of each case as shown in Figure 7.15, which gives the Average lifetime vs R curves for each case. Average lifetime is calculated considering many dierent random deployment setups for each case. According to Figure 7.15 L =
Lmax LRopt Lmax
100%.
The results tabulated in Table 7.7 clearly indicate maximum L (% dierence of the life time of the wireless sensor network when used R = Ropt calculated following the technique presented in Section 5.1 and the maximum lifetime achievable using any R for a given sensor network setup) is below 6.2%. Further, the average of the L of all results tabulated is 2.30 with standard deviation of 1.82. Hence, it can be conrmed that the analytical technique presented in Section 5.1 to derive Ropt is well acceptable for practical usage.
3
This was derived using N = A where =
1 2 4D
according to equation (A.1) of Appendix A.1
120
Table 7.7: Comparison of the average lifetime with Ropt against actual maximum lifetime Region 200 200 200 200 300 200 400 400 500 500 500 500 200 200 200 200 300 200 400 400 500 500 500 500 1002 1002 1502 2002 2502 2502 (c) (c) (c) (c) (c) (c) (p) (p) (p) (p) (p) (p) D 5 5 10 10 10 15 5 5 10 10 10 15 5 5 5 10 10 7.5 0.00 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.15 0.0000 0.0211 0.0083 0.0105 0.0223 0.0000 0.0000 0.0211 0.0083 0.0105 0.0223 0.0149 0.0000 0.0211 0.0211 0.0105 0.0223 0.0217 N 400 400 150 400 625 278 400 400 150 400 625 278 314 314 706 314 490 873 Ropt 49 26 39 54 45 170 75 27 59 54 45 68 45 26 26 53 44 35 L % 0.94 2.23 2.62 6.19 0.26 5.11 1.05 2.65 3.78 0.91 1.12 0.00 1.49 4.31 0.00 4.40 2.68 1.65
(c) (c) (c) (c) (c) (c)
500 480 Rounds Before 10% of Nodes Die 460 440 420 400 380 360 340 320 10 20 30 40

50
60
70
80
Figure 7.15: Typical Average Lifetime vs R curve for a given sensor network requirement
121
7.5.2
Validation of copt
Validity of the method nding copt (presented in Section 5.2) is tested using simulation experiment results of the following two scenarios. Case 1: 200 nodes each containing battery energy of 0.5J are deployed in a 100 100 region with base station located at the centre of one side of the perimeter. It will be assumed that this application supports perfect compressibility of data, i.e. = 0. It has set R = Ropt = 41, using the analytical framework proposed in Section 5.1. It is possible to realized copt = 0.556 for this setup by following the analytical technique proposed in Section 5.2. Case 2: There is a requirement to monitor a circular area with radius 75m. The base station is located at the centre of the area. The application expects a data compressibility of = 0.1 between two adjoining nodes expected to be 5m apart. Further, application expects the nodes to have exponential data correlation resulting = 0.0211. This requirement needs 177 nodes to be deployed. It is assumed that each node has 0.3J energy batteries. It has set R = Ropt = 27, using the technique proposed in Section 5.1. It can be realized that copt = 0.84 for this setup by following the analytical technique proposed in Section 5.2. Figures 7.16 and 7.17 demonstrate the impact on the sensor network lifetime due to the change in c of the above given two cases respectively. These results clearly indicate that the use of c = copt found, following the technique given in Section 5.2, would realize sharp edge of the lifetime curve with elongated knee point. Thus, it can be conrmed that the relevance of the analysis done in Section 5.2 on EDCR deriving c = copt in realizing an optimized the sensor network lifetime.
122
200 c=.100 c=.350 150 Number of Live Nodes c=.556 c=.750 c=.900 100
50
500
1000
1500 2000 2500 Data TX Rounds
3000
3500
4000
Figure 7.16: Dierent Lifetime curves of a WSN for dierent c: Case 1
180 160 140 Number of Live Nodes 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Number of Data TX Rounds 1400 1600 c=.100 c=.500 c=.840 c=.999
Figure 7.17: Dierent Lifetime curves of a WSN for dierent c: Case 2
123
7.6
Performance Evaluation of EDCR-MH
In this research, it has proven that EDCR algorithm achieves local energy balancing. However, when the network dimensions are considerable, there is an energy imbalance caused due to far end cluster heads have to transmit a longer distance to reach the base station. Hence, an extension to EDCR algorithm named EDCR-MH was proposed to tackle this in Section 6.1. Following presents, the simulation test results of EDCR-MH and EDCR algorithms applied to a wireless sensor test bed consist of 600 nodes, each with 0.5J battery energy, uniform randomly deployed in a square area of 200 200 with the base station at the centre of one side of perimeter. This simulation uses R = 60 and c = 0.8 found for EDCR-MH algorithm using the methods proposed in Section 6.1.2. Further, EDCRMH parameter dT H is set as, dT H = (DCH CH /2)2 + DCH CH 2 = 90.56 to ensure the
two neighboring cluster heads located to left and right of the closest cluster head to base station would not relay through it. Similarly, this simulation uses R = 66 and c = 0.75 for the EDCR algorithm, derived following the technique proposed in Section 5.1 and Section 5.2 respectively. Further, it is assumed that the target application support perfect data compressibility resulting = 0. Figure 7.18 evaluates the performance of EDCR-MH algorithm compared with EDCR algorithm. As it is expected, EDCR-MH has better lifetime performance in this setup by reducing the burden of far end cluster head by adapting multi-hop data transfer.
600 EDCRMH EDCR
500 Number of Live Nodes
400
300
200
100
500
1000
1500 2000 2500 3000 Number of Data TX Rounds
3500
4000
Figure 7.18: Lifetime comparison EDCR and EDCR-MH Based on the analysis presented in Section 6.1 and above simulation experiments, it 124
can be concluded that the burden of far end cluster heads being transferred to close by cluster heads in EDCR-MH algorithm. Hence, when there is large number of clusters in a given setup, the cluster heads close to the base station would face a signicant burden in relaying large number of packets. As a result, nodes closest to base station die rapidly in EDCR-MH specially when there are large number of clusters. Hence, this research proposed a further extension to EDCR and EDCR-MH algorithms named EDCR-EB in Section 6.2 to overcome the limitations of both EDCR and EDCR-MH algorithms. In what follows, performance of EDCR-EB algorithm is evaluated using simulation experiments.
7.7
Performance Evaluation of EDCR-EB
Following hypothetical sensor network deployment requirement is considered for simulation experiments to evaluate the performance of the EDCR-EB algorithm. There is a requirement to monitor a circular eld with radius r = 200 employing 100 clusters each containing 12 nodes. The aggregated data has to be sent to the base station located at the centre of this circular eld. Therefore, 1200 nodes each equipped with 1 J energy battery is uniform randomly deploy in this eld. In order to realize the required number of clusters, cluster head broadcasting range is set as R = 29 using equation (4.27). The algorithm parameter c is set to c = 0.65 using the guidelines given in Section 6.2.1. According to these settings, it is possible to expect an average distance to neighboring cluster heads, DCH CH = 39.15. Thus, there would be 5 dierent cluster levels. Hence by solving 0 = 1 = 2 = 3 = 4 , it is possible to nd a0 to a3 corresponding to each level as a0 = 0.3828, a1 = 0.6052, a2 = 0.7297 and a3 = 0.7798. Figure 7.19 illustrates when EDCR algorithm is employed for this sensor network setup, nodes which are far away from the base station die rst. On the other hand, when EDCRMH algorithm is used with this sensor network setup, nodes closest to base station die rst. This is revealed in Figure 7.20. As a result, lifetime performance of both EDCR and EDCR-MH algorithms are poor. This is clearly indicated in the lifetime curves given in Figure 7.21. However, the same gure conrms that the EDCR-EB algorithm has much better lifetime performance on the same sensor network setup compared to EDCR and EDCR-MH algorithms. The reason for this result is due to the fact that EDCR-EB algorithms ability in globally balancing of the energy dissipation rate. This is reconrmed by Figure 7.22. This clearly demonstrate that the 1st set of nodes die do not have same distance to the base station.
125
Figure 7.19: Far end nodes die rst with EDCR
Figure 7.20: Nodes close to BS die rst with EDCR-MH
126
1200 EDCREB EDCRMH EDCR
1000 Number of Live Sensor Nodes
800
600
400
200
1000
7000
Figure 7.21: Lifetime comparison between EDCR, EDCR-MH and EDCR-EB
Figure 7.22: First set of nodes die irrespective of node location in EDCR-EB
127
Research Contributions
In this research following contributions are made. 1. This research proposed a novel distributed clustering algorithm named EDCR for ad-hoc deployed large wireless sensor networks where cluster heads are selected and rotated based on residual energy of sensor nodes. This algorithm guarantees a local energy balancing with minimum overhead. This was rst published in [67]. 2. The performance of EDCR algorithm in terms of correctness, complexity and behavior was evaluated using analytical techniques in [69]. 3. Cluster head distribution of EDCR algorithm was analyzed in [70]. 4. The analysis on EDCR algorithm cluster head distribution was extended to other dependant thinning distributed clustering algorithms such as HEED, ANTCLUST, DMAC and MEDIC which too follows Dutch auction principle in cluster head selection in [75]. 5. Analytical technique in optimizing the cluster head role rotation of EDCR algorithm was rst discussed in [79]. 6. Applicability of EDCR algorithm in building monitoring applications and optimization of cluster head broadcasting range for a given application scenario with expected data redundancy is discussed in [68]. 7. Proposed local energy balancing distributed clustering algorithm (EDCR) was extended to use multi-hop communication between cluster heads and base station in [81]. 8. The local energy balancing algorithm was extended for global energy balancing in [83].
128
CHAPTER 8
Conclusion and Future Direction

This research proposes an energy ecient distributed clustering algorithm to self organize an ad-hoc deployed wireless sensor network for periodic data gathering to a distinct base station. Such a wireless sensor network consists of large number of inexpensive sensor nodes, each equipped with low power - low bit rate radio and low energy battery. Once these sensor nodes are deployed, upgrading or maintaining of individual nodes is not possible. In such a scenario, the main concern is optimal utilization of the node energy so that the entire sensor network lasts as long as possible, gathering useful information from the environment to the base station. Ideally, all deployed sensor nodes should operate as long as possible and deplete their battery energy at the same rate allowing a new set of nodes to be deployed rather than selective maintenance of each sensor node. For such periodic data gathering wireless sensor networks, previous researchers have proposed the use of energy based distributed clustering techniques such as LEACH, SEP, ANTCLUST, HEED, MEDIC and EDAC. This research has identied the strengths and weaknesses of these algorithms and proposes a new energy aware distributed clustering algorithm named EDCR. EDCR algorithm can achieve near perfect local energy balancing through residual energy based cluster head node selection, cluster boundary determination and cluster head role rotation. This has been realized using distributed decision making by nodes using local information. In this regard, EDCR algorithm uses energy ecient coordination techniques resulting in minimum energy overhead. Thus, EDCR algorithm produces a near ideal lifetime curve of a given local neighborhood. EDCR algorithm ensures that the node with most residual energy in a given neighborhood becomes the cluster head since it can expend more energy. Further, EDCR algorithm ensures no two cluster heads to be within R distance to each other and all nodes are either discovered by at least one cluster head or itself is a cluster head. Non cluster head nodes 129
join the closest cluster head with highest residual energy within its neighborhood. This reduces the burden on weaker cluster heads as well as reducing the communication energy of all nodes facilitating them to deplete energy at the same rate and allowing to die together. Further, these mechanisms permit EDCR algorithm performance to be identical for both homogeneous and heterogeneous energy networks. EDCR algorithm also produces a fairly stable number of clusters around the set point corresponding to the desired number of clusters. Further, these clusters are well distributed and cluster head tends to be close to the centre of the cluster area. This is directly attributed to the improved lifetime performance of EDCR algorithm compared to others of similar class of algorithms. This research proposes an analytical formula for resultant cluster density of EDCR algorithm. Further, it is found that the analysis of cluster density can be extended for other dependant thinning distributed clustering algorithms such as HEED, ANTCLUST, DMAC and MEDIC. This research also proposes analytical techniques to optimize EDCR algorithm parameters such as cluster head candidacy broadcasting range, R and cluster head role rotation trigger parameter, c with respect to lifetime measurements. Similarly, the research proposes a logical technique in determining the second degree neighborhood of any cluster head with a greater condence. The correctness, complexity and behavior of the EDCR algorithm is evaluated using analytical and simulation techniques. Matlab based simulation is also used to evaluate algorithm performance and applicability of the proposed techniques in nding optimum algorithm parameters. These analytical and simulation results show that the proposed EDCR algorithm can outperform algorithms of similar class such as LEACH, SEP, HEED, ANTCLUST, MEDIC and EDAC in terms of lifetime. EDCR algorithm can achieve local energy balancing with a minimum overhead resulting superior lifetime performance compared to similar class of existing algorithms. However, the work also shows that, when the sensor network deployment region dimensions become larger, there tends to be signicant global energy imbalances due to far distance nodes having to spend more energy in directly communicating to the base station. Even the existing algorithms of similar class have not resolved this. As a solution to this, the research proposes an extension to EDCR algorithm named EDCR-MH where cluster head to base station communication takes place using multi-hopping over the cluster head overlay. EDCR-MH realizes considerable improvement in performance. However, there can still be a signicant global energy imbalance as the cluster heads close to the base station have to relay data packets from other cluster heads. The impact of this would be signicant
130
when the number of clusters in the network is large. Hence, this research proposes a further extension to EDCR and EDCR-MH named EDCR-EB. EDCR-EB follows a mix strategy of EDCR and EDCR-MH; i.e. it uses a combination of multi-hop communication and direct communication between cluster heads and base station. At the beginning of any new clustering round, all cluster heads follow EDCR-MH. Then, gradually cluster heads close to the base station stop relaying incoming data packets to conserve their energy allowing the subsequent layer to directly communicate with the base station. After a while, the entire sensor network starts to follow the EDCR method; i.e. all cluster heads directly communicate with the base station. Further, this research proposes an analytical technique in nding the optimum instance of each cluster head to stop relaying incoming data packets. Hence, EDCR-EB achieves true energy balancing of the entire sensor network (i.e. both local and global energy balancing). As we have seen, the presented algorithms work well within the limits set by the objectives and assumptions therein. However, the proposed algorithms can be further rened, improved and extended if the following aspects are taken into consideration. 1. Applicability of EDCR algorithm for applications expecting extended lifetime at a reduced reliability : This research was carried out with the aim of achieving a sharp edge of the lifetime curve as shown in Figure 2.5. The reason to expect such a lifetime curve was to realize a high reliability of the information using a high level of redundancy of nodes. However, there may be applications where this requirement can be relaxed. For example, expectation of the extended lifetime at a reduced reliability with a high level of redundancy of nodes, i.e. the lifetime curve would have an elongated tail. This gradual node death expects few nodes alive in each neighborhood in order to provide at least a sub quality service. As shown in Figure 5.4, this can be achieved by varying the value of c towards 0. Thus, EDCR algorithm has inherent features to achieve such an objective. However, further research on the inuence of c on such a lifetime requirement may be required. 2. Applicability of EDCR algorithm in sensor networks with dierent energy distribution patterns : In this research, node energy distribution was limited to homogeneous energy (where all nodes would be equipped with equal amount of energy) and uniform random heterogeneous energy distribution (where the energy of all nodes are uniform randomly distributed among a given range, irrespective of the node location). Hence, exploration of other various energy distribution patterns among nodes (both location independent and dependent) has to be researched further. 131
3. Applicability of EDCR algorithm with heterogeneous node densities in the eld of monitoring : The current research restricted its scope of study to the uniform random spatial distribution of nodes (i.e. Poisson point distribution with homogeneous node density in the eld of monitoring). Scrutiny of the eect of the lifetime on the sensor network due to dierent node distribution patterns (local and global heterogeneous node densities) [84] would also be a feature of interest. 4. Impact of the number of nodes in a cluster to the network lifetime : In this study we proved that the resultant number of clusters E [k ] or the cluster density of DTDC class of algorithms (EDCR, HEED, MEDIC, DAMC and ANTCLUST), is independent of the node density or number of nodes in a neighborhood. Further, we proved that, when the number of nodes to be in a cluster is 10 or more, the formulae given in Section 4.2 hold true. Given these facts, what would be the impact of the number of nodes in a cluster to the lifetime of a given neighborhood/cluster (impact to the gradient of the lifetime curve) and to the entire network (time taken for FND, LND and PNA), are valid questions that can be raised in the study. As the number of nodes in each cluster increase, the number of nodes available to take the high energy consuming role increases. Similarly, this increases the burden of the cluster head node, as it has to serve a large number of member nodes. Researcher believes the positive impact of the increase of member nodes of a cluster in which cluster head to base station communication requires a high energy cost (far clusters in EDCR and near clusters in EDCR-MH), is signicant compared with one incurring low energy (near clusters in EDCR and far clusters in EDCR-MH). Thus, an analytical and experimental study of this would be a useful extension to this research. 5. Distributed radio channel assignment among clusters : This research assumed that there would not be adjoining cluster interference, as the adjoining clusters use dierent channels. This assumption is realistic, as most emerging low power radio transceivers are capable of supporting programmable channel selection. Thus, nding an eective distributed channel assignment [85], among clusters, would be another useful research. 6. Applicability of EDCR algorithm with a mobile base station : EDCR algorithm is developed considering a quasi stationary sensor network with xed base station for periodic data collection. It was observed that the use of mobile base station [86] [95], such as a low altitude remote controller plane or land vehicle, would help to further reduce the energy requirement in cluster head to base station communication. 132
However, this would increase the total cost of operation. Hence, it would be benecial to extend the EDCR algorithm to maximize the overall network lifetime at a minimum operating cost; i.e. at a minimum total cost of ownership. This would be another useful future research. 7. Applicability of EDCR algorithm in a mobile sensor network : EDCR algorithm was developed for a quasi stationary wireless sensor network. Researching the applicability of EDCR algorithm in mobile sensor networks [96] - [98] would be yet another future area of study. 8. Applicability of EDCR algorithm in an event detection application : This research considered a periodic data collection application in deriving the EDCR class of algorithms. A future research can also explore into the applicability of EDCR algorithm to organize ad-hoc deployed sensor nodes in event detection [99] - [102] using collective data processing. 9. Performance of EDCR algorithm in an environment with time varying radio channel properties : This study was conducted under the assumption that the wireless channel properties are time invariant and that there is no complex shadow eect to the channel. However, this assumption may not be realistic [103] - [104] in some environments. Hence, a study on the eect of cannel condition and shadowing to EDCR algorithm and how the algorithm parameters would be aected would be a useful extension to this research.
133
References
[1] J. Heidemann and R. Govindan, An overview of embedded sensor networks technical report ISI-TR-2004-594, tech. rep., USC/Information Sciences Institute, November 2004. [2] D. Culler, D. Estrin, and M. Srivastava, Overview of sensor networks, IEEE Computer, vol. 37, pp. 4149, August 2004. [3] DARPA, DARPA SensIT. http://www.darpa.mil/ipto/programs/sensit/, November 2005. [4] A. Baddeley, Network embedded systems technology. http://www.special-
operations-technology.com/article.cfm?DocID=443, April 2004. [5] G. Werner-Allen, J. Johnson, M. Ruiz, J. Lees, and M. Welsh, Monitoring volcanic eruptions with a wireless sensor network, in Second European Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks (EWSN05), 2005. [6] R. Szewczyk, E. Osterweil, J. Polastre, M. Hamilton, A. Mainwaring, and D. Estrin, Habitat monitoring with sensor networks, Communications of the ACM, vol. 47, pp. 3440, June 2004. [7] D. E. Culler, Toward the sensor network macroscope, in MobiHoc 05: Proceedings of the 6th ACM international symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking and computing, pp. 11, ACM, 2005. [8] N. Dhyanesh and S. Raghavan, Sensors on sea (SOS): A simple novel sensor-based best-eort system for ocean related disaster management, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Sensing and Information Processing, pp. 206211, 2004. [9] M. Wang, J. Cao, B. Chen, Y. Xu, and J. Li, Distributed processing in wireless sensor networks for structural health monitoring, Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4611/2007, pp. 103112, August 2007. 134
[10] W. Zhengzhong, L. Zilin, L. Jun, and H. Xiaowei, Wireless sensor networks for living environment monitoring, in World Congress on Software Engineering, vol. 3, pp. 2225, May 2009. [11] E.-H. Ng, S.-L. Tan, and J. Guzman, Road trac monitoring using a wireless vehicle sensor network, in International Symposium on Intelligent Signal Processing and Communications Systems, 2008. ISPACS 2008., pp. 14, February 2009. [12] T. Wark, P. Corke, P. Sikka, L. Klingbeil, Y. Guo, C. Crossman, P. Valencia, D. Swain, and G. Bishop-Hurley, Transforming agriculture through pervasive wireless sensor networks, IEEE Pervasive Computing, vol. 6, pp. 5057, April-June 2007. [13] Intel Inc, Technology and research on sensor nets.
http://www.intel.com/research/exploratory/wireless sensors.htm, November 2005. [14] Microsoft Research, Sensor Networks Get a Kick-Start .
http://research.microsoft.com/displayArticle.aspx?id=1360, November 2005. [15] T. Sun, L.-J. Chen, C.-C. Han, and M. Gerla, Improving data reliability via exploiting redundancy in sensor networks, UCLA Computer Science Technical Report CSD-TR No. 040037, UCLA Computer Science Department, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA, 2004. [16] A. A. Abbasi and M. Younis, A survey on clustering algorithms for wireless sensor networks, Computer Communications, vol. 30, no. 14-15, pp. 28262841, 2007. [17] D. Estrin, R. Govindan, J. Heidemann, and S. Kumar, Next century challenges: Scalable coordination in sensor networks, in Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, pp. 263270, August 1999. [18] J. Ibriq and I. Mahgoub, Cluster-based routing in wireless sensor networks: Issues and challenges, in Proceedings of the 2004 Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer Telecommunication Systems (SPECTS04), pp. 759766, 2004. [19] W. B. Heinzelman, A. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan, Energy-ecient communication protocol for wireless microsensor networks, in Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 30053014, January 2000. [20] W. B. Heinzelman, A. P. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan, An applicationspecic protocol architecture for wireless microsensor networks, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 1, pp. 660670, October 2002. 135
[21] W. B. Heinzelman, Application-Specic Protocol Architectures for Wireless Networks. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute Of Technology, June 2000. [22] M. J. Handy, M. Haase, and D. Timmermann, Low energy adaptive clustering hierarchy with deterministic cluster-head selection, in 4th International Workshop on Mobile and Wireless Communications Network, pp. 368372, World Scientic Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., September 2002. [23] A. D. Pedri, A. Zanella, and R. Verdone, An energy ecient protocol for wireless ad hoc sensor networks, in IEEE AINS2003, (Menlo Park, Califonia, USA), pp. 16, June 2003. [24] G. Smaragdakis, I. Matta, and A. Bestavros, SEP: A stable election protocol for clustered heterogeneous wireless sensor networks, in Proceedings of the International Workshop on SANPA, (Boston), pp. 111, August 2004. [25] S. D. Muruganathan, D. C. F. Ma, R. I. Bhasin, and A. O. Fapojuwo, A centralized energy-ecient routing protocol for wireless sensor networks, IEEE Communications, vol. 43, pp. 813, March 2005. [26] J. Kamimura, N. Wakamiya, and M. Murata, Energy-ecient clustering method for data gathering in sensor networks, in Proceedings of the First Workshop on Broadband Advanced Sensor Networks, (San Jose, California), October 2004. [27] O. Younis and S. Fahmy, HEED: A hybrid, energy-ecient, distributed clustering approach for ad-hoc sensor networks, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 3, pp. 366379, October-December 2004. [28] O. Younis, An Energy-Ecient Architecture For Wireless Sensor Networks. PhD thesis, Purdue University, August 2005. [29] H. Chan and A. Perrig, ACE: An emergent algorithm for highly uniform cluster formation, in Proceedings of the First European Workshop on Sensor Networks (EWSN), pp. 154171, January 2004. [30] S. Lee, J. Yoo, and T. Chung, Distance-based energy ecient clustering for wireless sensor networks, in Proceedings of the 29th Annual IEEE International Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN04), pp. 1618, November 2004. [31] S. Ghiasi, A. Srivastava, X. Yang, and M. Sarrafzadeh, Optimal energy aware clustering in sensor networks, Sensors Magazine, vol. 2, pp. 258269, January 2002.
136
[32] K. Sohrabi, W. Merrill, J. Elson, L. Girod, F. Newberg, and W. Kaiser, Methods for scalable self-assembly of ad hoc wireless sensor networks, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 3, pp. 317331, October 2004. [33] M. Yu, K. K. Leung, and A. Malvankar, A dynamic clustering and energy ecient routing technique for sensor networks, IEEE Transactions On Wireless Communications, vol. 6, pp. 30693079, August 2007. [34] O. Younis, S. Fahmy, and P. Santi, An architecture for robust sensor network communications, International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 1, pp. 305 327, July 2005. [35] Y. Wang, Q. Zhao, and D. Zheng, Energy-driven adaptive clustering data collection protocol in wireless sensor networks, in Proceedings of the 2004 International Conference on Intelligent Mechatronics and Automation (ICIMA2004), (UESTC, Chengdu, China), pp. 599604, August 2004. [36] S. Bandyopadhyay and E. J. Coyle, An energy ecient hierarchical clustering algorithm for wireless sensor networks, in 22nd Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM 2003), (San Francisco, California), April 2003. [37] M. Younis, M. Youssef, and K. Arisha, Energy-aware management for cluster-based sensor networks, Computer Networks: The International Journal of Computer and Telecommunications Networking, vol. 43, pp. 649668, December 2003. [38] S. J. Baek, G. de Veciana, , and X. Su, Minimizing energy consumption in large-scale sensor networks through distributed data compression and hierarchical aggregation, IEEE Journal On Selected Areas In Communications, vol. 22, pp. 11301140, August 2004. [39] X. Hao, Y. Kang, and Y. Wang, Geographical-based multihop clustering algorithm for distributed wireless sensor network, in 7th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation, (Chongqing, China), June 2008. [40] H. He-qing, S. Jie, Y. Dao-yuan, M. Kui, and L. Hai-tao, An energy-driven adaptive cluster head rotation algorithm for wireless sensor networks, Journal of Electronics & Information Technology, vol. 31, pp. 10401044, May 2009. [41] A. Cerpa and D. Estrin, ASCENT: adaptive self-conguring sensor networks topologies, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 3, pp. 272285, July-August 2004. 137
[42] Z. Cheng, M. Perillo, and W. B. Heinzelman, General network lifetime and cost models for evaluating sensor network deployment strategies, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 7, pp. 484497, April 2008. [43] O. Younis, M. Krunz, and S. Ramasubramanian, Node clustering in wireless sensor networks: recent developments and deployment challenges, IEEE Network, vol. 20, pp. 2025, May 2006. [44] B. Krishnamachari, Networking Wireless Sensors. Cambridge University Press, 2005. [45] M. Xie and X. Wang, An energy-ecient TDMA protocol for clustered wireless sensor networks, in 2008 ISECS International Colloquium on Computing, Communication, Control, and Management, pp. 547551, 2008. [46] Q. Wang, H. Hassanein, and G. Takahara, Stochastic modeling of distributed, dynamic, randomized clustering protocols for wireless sensor networks, in Proceedings of the 2004 International Conference on Parallel Processing Workshops (ICPPW04), pp. 456463, 2004. [47] S. M. Guru, A. Hsu, S. Halgamuge, and S. Fernando, An extended growing selforganizing map for selection of clusters in sensor networks, International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 1, pp. 227243, April 2005. [48] L. Zhao and Q. Liang, Medium-contention based energy-ecient distributed clustering (MEDIC) for wireless sensor networks, International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 3, pp. 347369, October 2007. [49] Texas Instruments, CC1101 Data Sheet. http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/swrs061e/swrs061e.pdf, October 2009. [50] S. Lindsey, C. Raghavendra, and K. M. Sivalingam, Data gathering algorithms in sensor networks using energy metrics, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 13, pp. 924935, September 2002. [51] S. E. Dreyfus and A. M. Law, The art and theory of dynamic programming. Academic Press, Inc., 1977. [52] S. Dasgupta, C. Papadimitriou, and U. Vazirani, Algorithms. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2007. [53] B. Elbhiri, R. Saadane, and D. Aboutajdine, Stochastic distributed energy ecient clustering (SDEEC) for heterogeneous wireless sensor networks, ICGST-CNIR Journal, vol. 9, pp. 1117, December 2009. 138
[54] P. Hebden and A. R. Pearce, Distributed asynchronous clustering for selforganisation of wireless sensor networks, in Fourth International Conference on Intelligent Sensing and Information Processing, 2006. ICISIP 2006., October 2006. [55] F. A. Aderohunmu, J. D. Deng, and M. K. Purvis, Enhancing clustering in wireless sensor networks with energy heterogeneity, Monograph 871, Unversity of Otago, New Zealand, http://eprints.otago.ac.nz/871/, November 2009. [56] J. Kamimura, Self-organizing clustering method for energy-ecient data gathering in sensor networks, Masters thesis, Department of Information Networking, Graduate School of Information Science and Technology, Osaka University, February 2005. [57] K. Leibnitz, N. Wakamiya, M. Murata, and M.-A. Remiche, Analysis of energy consumption for a biological clustering method in sensor networks, in Third International Workshop on Measurement, Modelling, and Performance Analysis of Wireless Sensor Networks SenMetrics 2005, (San Diego, USA), pp. 158165, July 2005. [58] Texas Instrument, MSP430 16 bit Ultra Low Power MCUs.
http://focus.ti.com/paramsearch/docs/, October 2009. [59] Atmel, Atmel AT86RF212 Transceiver Data Sheet. October
http://www.atmel.com/dyn/resources/prod documents/doc8168.pdf, 2009. [60] Semtech, Semtech SX1212 Tranceiver Data
Sheet.
http://www.semtech.com/products/sx1212/, October 2009. [61] J. L. Hill, System Architecture for Wireless Sensor Networks. PhD thesis, University Of California, Berkeley, Spring 2003. [62] T. Voigt, H. Ritter, and J. Schiller, Utilizing renewable energy in cluster-based sensor networks, in 1st Swedish National Computer Networking Workshop, (Arlandastad, Sweden), September 2003. [63] W. K. G. Seah, Z. A. Eu, and H.-P. Tan, Wireless sensor networks powered by ambient energy harvesting (WSN-HEAP) - survey and challenges, in 1st International Conference on Wireless Communication, Vehicular Technology, Information Theory and Aerospace & Electronic Systems Technology, 2009. Wireless VITAE 2009, (Aalborg), pp. 15, May 2009. [64] A. T. Hoang and M. Motani, Collaborative broadcasting and compression in clusterbased wireless sensor networks, ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks (TOSN), vol. 3, August 2007. 139
[65] V. P. Mhatre, C. Rosenberg, D. Kofman, R. Mazumdar, and N. Shro, A minimum cost heterogeneous sensor network with a lifetime constraint, IEEE Transactions On Mobile Computing, vol. 4, pp. 415, January/February 2005. [66] A. Boukerche, H. A. Oliveira, E. F. Nakamura, and A. A. Loureiro, DV-Loc: A scalable localization protocol using voronoi diagrams for wireless sensor networks, IEEE Wireless Communications, pp. 5055, April 2009. [67] S. Gamwarige and E. Kulasekere, An algorithm for energy driven cluster head rotation in a distributed wireless sensor network, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Information and Automation (ICIA2005), (Colombo, Sri Lanka), pp. 354 359, December 2005. [68] S. Gamwarige and C. Kulasekere, An energy ecient distributed clustering algorithm for ad hoc deployed wireless sensor networks in building monitoring applications, Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. Special Issue: Sensor Network on Building Monitoring: from Theory to Real Application, pp. 1127, 2009. [69] S. Gamwarige and E. Kulasekere, Performance analysis of the EDCR algorithm in a distributed wireless sensor network, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Wireless and Optical Communication Networks WOCN2006, (Bangalore), April 2006. [70] S. Gamwarige and C. Kulasekere, An analytical framework for cluster distribution of EDCR class of algorithms in wireless sensor networks, in Fourth International Conference on Industrial and Information Systems, 2009. ICIIS2009., (Peradeniya, Sri Lanka), pp. 16, December 2009. [71] B. Mat ern, Spatial variation, vol. 36. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY., 2 ed., 1986. [72] M. L. Huber and R. L. Wolpert, Likelihood-based inference for Matern Type III re-pulsive point processes. Under Invited Revision in Applied Probability Trust, http://ftp.stat.duke.edu/WorkingPapers/08-27.pdf, February 2009. [73] C. Bettstetter, The cluster density of a distributed clustering algorithm in ad hoc networks, in IEEE International Conference on Communications, 2004, pp. 2024, June 2004. [74] S. Basagni, Distributed clustering for ad hoc networks, in Fourth International Symposium on Parallel Architectures, Algorithms, and Networks (ISPAN), (Perth/Fremantle, WA, Australia), 1999.
140
[75] S. Gamwarige and C. Kulasekere, Cluster density of dependant thinning distributed clustering class of algorithms in ad-hoc deployed wireless networks. Under review in IAENG International Journal of Computer Science, May 2010. [76] B. Gosh, Random distances within a rectangle and between two rectangles, Bull. Calcutta Math. Soc., vol. 43, pp. 1724, 1951. [77] H. C. Tuckwell, Elementary Applications of Probability Theory, Second Edition. London: Chapman & Hall, 1995. [78] K. Brakke, 200,000,000 random voronoi polygons.
www.susqu.edu/brakke/papers/voronoi.htm, 1986. [79] S. Gamwarige and C. Kulasekere, Optimization of cluster head rotation in energy constrained wireless sensor networks, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Wireless and Optical Communication Networks WOCN2007, (Singapore), July 2007. [80] V. Mhatre and C. Rosenberg, Design guide lines for wireless sensor networks: Communication, clustering and aggregation, Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 2, pp. 4563, 2004. [81] S. Gamwarige and C. Kulasekere, Application of the EDCR algorithm in a cluster based multi-hop wireless sensor network, in Proceedings of the International Symposium on Communications and Information Technologies 2006 ISCIT 2006, (Bangkok, Thailand), October 2006. [82] I. Raicu, L. Schwiebert, S. Fowler, and S. Gupta, Local load balancing for globally ecient routing in wireless sensor networks, International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 1, pp. 163185, 2005. [83] S. Gamwarige and C. Kulasekere, A cluster based energy balancing strategy to improve wireless sensor network lifetime, in International Conference on Industrial and Information Systems, 2007. ICIIS 2007., (Penadeniya, Sri Lanka), pp. 403408, August 2007. [84] C. Bettstetter, M. Gyarmati, and U. Schilcher, An inhomogeneous spatial node distribution and its stochastic properties, in Proceedings of the 10th ACM Symposium on Modeling, analysis, and simulation of wireless and mobile systems MSWiM 07, pp. 400404, 2007. [85] C. Liu, Z. Liu, Y. Liu, H. Zhao, T. Zhao, and W. Yan, A clustering based channel assignment algorithm and routing metric for multi-channel wireless mesh networks,
141
Parallel and Distributed Processing and Applications, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4742/2007, pp. 832843, 2007. [86] Z. M. Wang, S. Basagni, E. Melachrinoudis, and C. Petrioli, Exploiting sink mobility for maximizing sensor networks lifetime, in Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS05), IEEE Computer Society, 2005. [87] S. Basagni, A. Carosi, and C. Petrioli, Controlled vs. uncontrolled mobility in wireless sensor networks: Some performance insights, Vehicular Technology Conference, vol. 2007, September. [88] C. Chen, J. Ma, and K. Yu, Designing energy-ecient wireless sensor networks with mobile sinks, World-Sensor-Web at SenSys, October 2006. [89] A. Chakrabarti, A. Sabharwal, and B. Aazhang, Using predictable observer mobility for power ecient design of sensor networks, in The second International Workshop on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN), 2003. [90] Y. Tirta, Z. Li, Y.-H. Lu, and S. Bagchi, Ecient collection of sensor data in remote elds using mobile collectors, in 13th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks ICCCN, 2004. [91] S. Basagni, A. Carosi, E. Melachrinoudis, C. Petrioli, and Z. M. Wang, Controlled sink mobility for prolonging wireless sensor networks lifetime, Wireless Networks, Springer, vol. 14, pp. 831858, February 2008. [92] Z. Khalid, G. Ahmed, and N. M. Khan, Impact of mobile sink speed on the performance of wireless sensor networks, Journal of Information & Communication, Technology of Institute of Business and Technology (Biztek), Pakistan, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 49 55, Fall 2007. [93] E. Ekici, Y. Gu, and D. Bozdag, Mobility-based communication in wireless sensor networks, IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 44, pp. 56 62, July 2006. [94] M. Gokhan, Q. ZHAO, and L. TONG, Sensor networks with mobile access : Energy and capacity considerations, IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 54, no. 11, pp. 20332044, 2006. [95] M. Lotnezhad and B. Liang, Energy ecient clustering in sensor networks with mobile agents, in IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, March 2005.
142
[96] L. M. Arboleda C. and N. Nasser, Cluster-based routing protocol for mobile sensor networks, in QShine 06: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Quality of service in heterogeneous wired/wireless networks, 2006. [97] Y.-B. Kong, K.-B. Chang, and G.-T. Park, Clustering algorithm using bayes rule in mobile wireless sensor networks, in Special Session on Intelligent Ad Hoc Networks and Wireless Sensor Networks, pp. 13061310, September 2006. [98] X. Wu, L. Shu, M. Meng, J. Cho, and S. Lee, Coverage-driven self-deployment for cluster based mobile sensor networks, in CIT 06: Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology, IEEE Computer Society, 2006. [99] S. Kumar, K. K. R. Kambhatla, B. Zan, F. Hu, and Y. Xiao, An energy-aware and intelligent cluster-based event detection scheme in wireless sensor networks, International Journal of Sensor Networks, vol. 3, pp. 123133, February 2008. [100] S. Li, D. Qian, Y. Liu, and Y. Bai, Energy ecient event detection and dissemination scheme for clustered wireless sensor networks, in Fifth International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Communications, pp. 105109, August 2009. [101] M. Marta, Y. Yang, and M. Cardei, Energy-ecient composite event detection in wireless sensor networks, in WASA 09: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Wireless Algorithms, Systems, and Applications, pp. 94103, August 2009. [102] Z. Charbiwala, Y. Kim, S. Zahedi, J. Friedman, and M. B. Srivastava, Energy ecient sampling for event detection in wireless sensor networks, in ISLPED 09: Proceedings of the 14th ACM/IEEE international symposium on Low power electronics and design, pp. 419424, 2009. [103] X. H. Lina and Y. K. Kwokb, CAEM: A channel adaptive approach to energy management for wireless sensor networks, Computer Communications, vol. 29, pp. 3343 3353, November 2006. [104] L. C. Wang, C. W. Wang, and C. M. Liu, Optimal number of clusters in dense wireless sensor networks: A cross-layer approach, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 58, pp. 966976, February 2009.
143
APPENDIX A
A.1
Expected Distance between Two Immediate Neighboring Nodes
of any two adjoining sensor nodes can be calculated using the fact The expected distance D that the ad-hoc deployed nodes are distributed as a 2D Poisson point process with intensity . The random distance D between a node and its nearest neighbor node is determined rst. For x > 0, the cumulative PDF of D is given by FD (x) = P (D x) = 1 P (D > x) = 1 P (No other nodes in the disk of area x2 centre at itself ) = 1 ex
2
Hence, the PDF of D can be derived as fD (x) = dFD (x) dx

2
= 2xex
between any two adjoining sensor nodes can be denoted Therefore, the expected distance D by = D
0
xfD (x)dx (A.1)
1 = 2
A.2
Energy Optimum Cluster Head Location in an Arbitrary Cluster
It will be assumed that there are N (>> 1) number of sensor nodes uniform randomly deployed in an arbitrary cluster area A resulting a Poisson point process with intensity = N/A. Further, it is assumed that the cluster head is located at (x0 , y0 ) location with 144
respect to Cartesian coordinate system. Hence, the total energy cost of transferring of data to the cluster head from all non cluster head nodes can be given by,
N
bits
S=
i=1
Eelec +
amp
(xi x0 )2 + (yi y0 )2
n 2
can be derived using Theorem 1 of [57] Therefore, the expected value of S denoted by S derived by Campbells Theorem as = S
A
N Eelec + A
amp
(x x0 )2 + (y y0 )2
n 2
dx dy
, it is necessary to nd In order to nd the minimum S S =0 x0 and S = 0. y0
It can be safely assumed that, the intra cluster communication follows Free Space radio will be minimized when propagation model, i.e. n = 2. Then S x0 =
A
x dx dy A
and
y0 =
A
y dx dy A
This implies that the cluster head should be located at the geometric centre of the cluster area.
A.3
Global Re-clustering or Local Cluster Head Role Delegation
Cluster heads consume more energy than non cluster head nodes. Hence, cluster head role should be rotated among all nodes to facilitate even energy expenditure by all nodes in the sensor network. This can be done in two methods. First method is re-clustering of the entire sensor network (global re-clustering) whenever the cluster head role to be rotated. The main advantage of this method is that it allows cluster heads to be placed closed to the geometric centre of their cluster, resulting lesser total transmission energy for intra cluster communication. However, there is an energy cost for re-clustering. The second method is once cluster boundaries are determined cluster head role is delegated among nodes within the cluster (local delegation). The advantage of this method is that its low energy overhead in cluster head role rotation compared to global re-clustering. However, the main drawback of this method is that most of the time cluster head location is skewed, resulting a higher energy for intra cluster communication. In what follows, most suitable technique (global re-clustering or local delegation) for a given condition will be examined. For this analysis, it will be assumed that the cluster head role is periodically rotated after a xed x number of data gathering rounds. Further, it is assumed that the cluster 145
area is a circle with radius Rc and all nodes are uniform randomly distributed in this area, resulting a Poisson point process with intensity . Hence, the expected number of nodes in
2 . The word Epoch is dened as the total time which allows all the cluster to be Nn = Rc
nodes to function as a cluster head once. Hence, an Epoch consists of xNn number of total data gathering rounds. The main dierence in total energy cost per an Epoch in global re-clustering and local delegation is the intra cluster communication cost and cluster head role rotation overhead. Global Re-clustering It is assumed that the cluster heads always at the centre of their respective clusters, i.e. at the centre of the circle with radius Rc as shown in Figure A.1.
Rc
CH
ri
Figure A.1: Cluster head location in global re-clustered cluster The total intra cluster energy cost in any one data gathering round can be denoted as E0,0 where cluster head is at the centre of its cluster (Without loss of generality, centre of the cluster is consider as the (0, 0) location). This will be given by,
Nn
E0,0 =
i=1
Eelec +
n amp ri
Therefore, the expected total value of E0,0 given by E 0,0 can be written using Theorem 1 of [57] derived using Campbells Theorem as, E 0,0 =
0 2 = 2Rc 2 0 n Eelec amp Rc + 2 n+2 Rc
(Eelec +
amp r
) r dr d (A.2)
Total energy cost of intra cluster data gathering and cluster maintenance overhead during an Epoch will be denoted as ET GR . Hence, ET GR = Nn xE 0,0 + Nn (ECHohGR + (Nn 1)EnonCHohGR )
2 2 2 = Rc xE 0,0 + Rc ECHohGR + Rc EnonCHohGR
(A.3)
146
where, ECHohGR and EnonCHohGR refers to the energy overhead in re-clustering for a cluster head node and non cluster head node respectively (in global re-clustering). Local Delegation Now, total energy cost of intra cluster data gathering and cluster maintenance overhead, during an Epoch will be determined, when the clusters are maintained using local cluster head role delegation. It is assumed that, at a given moment, cluster head is located at (, ) location and any node i is located at (r, ) location with respect to polar co-ordinate system as shown in Figure A.2. If the distance between any node i and its cluster head is denoted as di , then
Rc CH (, ) d i (r, )
Figure A.2: Cluster head location in local cluster head role rotation this can be given by equation (A.4) using cosine theorem. di = r2 + 2 2r cos( )
1 2
(A.4)
Total intra cluster energy cost in one data gathering round can be denoted as E, , where (, ) is the location of the cluster head. This can be given by
Nn
E, =
i=1
Eelec +
n amp di
Therefore, the expected value of E, denoted by E , can be given using Theorem 1 of [57] derived by Campbells Theorem as, E , =
0 2 0 Rc
Eelec +
amp
r2 + 2 2r cos( )
n 2
r dr d
(A.5)
Total energy cost of intra cluster data gathering and cluster maintenance energy cost during an Epoch can be denoted as ET LD .
Nn
ET LD = E [x
j =1
E ] + Nn ECHohLD + (Nn 1)EnonCHohLD j ,j
147
Therefore, again using Theorem 1 of [57] derived by Campbells Theorem,

2 Rc 0
ET LD = x
0
2 2 E, d d + Rc ECHohLD + Rc EnonCHohLD
(A.6)
where, ECHohLD and EnonCHohLD refers to the energy overhead in cluster head role rotation for a cluster head node and non cluster head node respectively when the local cluster head role delegation is employed as the mechanism of cluster head role rotation. Now, the conditions which would make a typical global re-clustering to be more energy ecient than local delegation is tested. For this, following assumptions are considered. 1. Intra
amp
cluster =
communication n = 2.
follows
Free
Space
communication
model,
i.e.
ampf s ,
2. It is possible to neglect the energy overhead in local cluster head role delegation, i.e. ECHohLD 0 and EnonCHohLD 0. Hence, ET GR and ET LD can be simplied as follows.
2 ET GR = xNn
Eelec +
2 ampf s Rc
+ Nn (ECHohGR + Nn EnonCHohGR )
2 ampf s Rc
2 ET LD = xNn
Eelec +
Therefore, ET LD ET GR = Nn xNn 2
2 ampf s Rc
2 (ECHohGR + Nn EnonCHohGR )
(A.7)
If a typical use case is considered where Nn = 20, Rc = 30, cluster head would have about 10 overhead messages and a none cluster head have 2 overhead messages each with number of bits then, ECHohGR = 10 Eelec +
2 ampf s Rc 2 ampf s Rc
+ 2Nn Eelec + 10Eelec
EnonCHohGR = 2 Eelec + Further, it is known that

ampf s
= 10pJ/bit/m2 and Eelec = 50nJ/bit. Based on these
numbers, ET LD ET GR 0 when x 5.1. Hence, global re-clustering is more energy ecient as in practice x >> 1.
148

Sankalpa PHD Thesis Final 2010-10-28

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sankalpa PHD Thesis Final 2010-10-28

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AN ENERGY EFFICIENT DISTRIBUTED CLUSTER BASED SELF ORGANISING ALGORITHM FOR AD-HOC DEPLOYED WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

Prasanna Sankalpa Gamwarige

Prasanna Sankalpa Gamwarige

Dr. Chulantha Kulasekere Thesis Supervisor

Prof. Saman Halgamuge University of Melbourne

Prof. Keerthi Walgama University of Peradeniya

Prof. Dileeka Dias University of Moratuwa

Dr. Ajith Pasqual University of Moratuwa

Dr. Chulantha Kulasekere University of Moratuwa October 1, 2010.

To Arosha the Love of My Life

MEDIC: Medium-Contention Based Energy-Ecient Distributed Clustering Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 19 20 20 22 23 23 27 28

Algorithm Pseudo Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Computation of Optimum Cluster Head Rotation Trigger Function Parameter, copt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Estimation of Second Degree Neighborhood Determining Parameter

EDCR-EB Algorithm 6.2.1 6.2.2

97 98 104 110 111

Cluster Distribution and Cluster Head Location in a Cluster

Performance Evaluation of EDCR-MH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Performance Evaluation of EDCR-EB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A.3 Global Re-clustering or Local Cluster Head Role Delegation . . . . . . . . .

1.1 2.1 2.2 2.3

Second degree neighborhood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

State change of a sensor node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Smallest possible cluster size

create uncovered region shaded in gray . . .

5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 6.1 6.2

6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 7.1

Node distribution among all clusters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

110 112 113 114 118 118

7.3 7.4 7.5

Energy cost of data aggregation. Bit length of a data packet.

Physical Environment can be browsed over the Internet

Figure 1.1: Browsing physical environment over the Internet

Current Challenges in Sensor Networks

Direction of the Research

Challenges in Cluster based Self Organization

Scope of the Research

analytical results are backed by simulation results.

Organization of the Thesis

Overview of Energy Aware Communication Protocols

Wireless Sensor Network Clustering Algorithms

LEACH: Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy

Figure 2.1: Non uniform cluster formation in LEACH

HEED: Hybrid Energy Ecient Distributed Clustering

MEDIC: Medium-Contention Based Energy-Ecient Distributed Clustering Algorithm

Anatomy of a Wireless Sensor Node

Battary + Optional Environmental Energy Harvesting Device

Low Power RF Tranceiver

Figure 2.2: Anatomy of a wireless sensor node

Ultra Low Power Micro Controllers

Low Power Wireless Transceivers

Current Consumption (mA)

Output TX Power (dBm)

Battery and Optional Energy Harvesting Techniques

Sensor Network Model

in which > 0. Note that, = 0 is identical to the perfect data correlation. 25

Energy Consumption Model

Figure 2.4: Radio energy dissipation model

computed using equations (2.1) and (2.2).

ET x ( , d) = ET xelec ( ) + ET xamp ( , d) = Eelec + ERx ( ) = ERxelec ( ) = Eelec where

n = 4, for simulation work. In the free space model ET xamp ( , d) =

correspond to the radio propagation attenuation constant corre-

Lifetime of the Sensor Network