Printer Friendly

An algorithm for energy efficient cooperative communication in wireless sensor networks.

1. Introduction

Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) have drawn more attention from researchers recently because they find applications spanning over vast and varied areas such as fire detection, habitat sensing and target tracking etc., The sensor nodes deployed in WSNs usually consists of sensing, data processing and communicating components, which make them fully functional wireless node. The sensor nodes are tiny and typically powered by small batteries, for which replacement, even if possible, is highly expensive and intricate [1]. Hence, energy efficiency in WSN has become the practical challenge and design focus recently, besides the other requirements such as reliability and throughput.

The Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) technique is a low power long distance communication method [2] which has the potential to support higher data rate and dramatically reduces transmit energy consumption over multipath fading channels. The MIMO technique deploys multiple antennas, both at the transmitter and receiver, and provides diversity gain [3]-[5]. The MIMO provides coding gain also, when it is used in conjunction with appropriate space time coding (e.g. space time trellis code). These gains can be utilized to conserve the energy of the sensor nodes. However, direct pertinence of MIMO technology in WSN is highly impractical due to the small physical size of a sensor node which may only be able to support single antenna. WSN nodes are usually designed to communicate using Single Input Single Output (SISO) technology through a single antenna.

As a solution to the problem, Cooperative Communication (CC) concept has been proposed in [6]. In CC, multiple nodes which have only single antenna, cooperate and coordinate among them, simultaneously transmit, receive, decode and retransmit the data. The CC establishes a Virtual MIMO (V-MIMO) system, so that energy efficient MIMO schemes can be utilized. In wireless environments, the received power falls off as the kth power of distance, with 2 [less than or equal to] k [less than or equal to] 6, where k is the channel path loss exponent. Hence, the transmit energy is conserved by using multi-hop routing [7] and smaller transmission distance (d [less than or equal to] 100 m) is chosen for each hop. The smaller transmission distance makes the transmit energy comparable with the circuit energy along the signal path. Hence, both transmit energy and circuit energy consumption needs to be considered in determining the optimal transmission distance.

In [8], the authors investigated the energy consumption of Multiple Input Single Output (MISO) in WSN. The authors assumed same bit error probability of the broadcast phase and the bit error probability of the cooperative phase. In addition, the authors used fixed distance d =100 m. In [9], the authors investigated the energy efficiency of cooperative communication in WSN. The authors used optimal broadcast bit error probability and optimal number of cooperating nodes. In addition, the authors used fixed distance d =200 m.

In the proposed work, an algorithm for energy efficient co-operative communication in WSN is proposed with optimal distance and optimal number of nodes.

The main contributions of the paper are

(i) The equations for optimal broadcast bit error probability and the optimal long haul distance that maximizes the energy efficiency is derived.

(ii) An algorithm for energy efficient cooperative communication in WSN is proposed.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The related work is presented in section 2. Section 3 describes the system model. Simulation results are given in section 4. Finally, section 5 concludes the paper.

2. Related Work

Most of the pioneering research in the area of network lifetime prolongation has focused on transmission schemes to reduce the total energy required per bit. The total energy required per bit per hop includes both the circuit energy consumption and transmit energy consumption and is directly proportional to the transmission distance, reliability and the number of nodes participating in the CC. On the other hand, the total energy required per bit per node is directly proportional to the transmission distance, reliability and inversely proportional to the number of nodes participating in the CC.

In [6], the authors analyzed the energy consumption profiles of V-MIMO and SISO for single hop and showed that significant energy conservation can be obtained when the transmission distance exceeds 25 m. With the system parameters given in [6], when the distance between the transmitter and receiver is greater than 25 m called threshold distance, MIMO is energy efficient than SISO. The dependency of energy efficiency on propagation parameters and extra training overhead is investigated in [10].

In [11], the authors proposed an energy efficient algorithm to address the node selection problem in MIMO-based sensor networks. They investigated the effect of circuit power consumption on the performance of MIMO-based sensor networks. They demonstrated the energy efficiency of V-MIMO even for smaller distances, provided the circuit power consumption is small. The authors proposed a metric which is a function of channel conditions and remaining battery energy for selecting the cooperating nodes. They also analyzed the influence of number of cooperating nodes on network lifetime. They achieved additional energy saving and improved network lifetime by selecting the cooperating nodes.

In [12], the authors proposed an energy efficient multi-hop cooperative MIMO scheme for limited number of available cooperating nodes in wireless sensor networks. They analyzed the energy consumption of SISO, multi-hop SISO and cooperative MIMO schemes. They also investigated the optimal number of transmitting and receiving cooperating nodes for a given transmission distance. The authors demonstrated the energy efficiency of proposed scheme and its demand for less network resource over conventional SISO, multi-hop SISO and cooperative MIMO schemes.

In [13], the authors analyzed the energy efficiency of cooperative schemes and showed that the cooperation is more energy efficient than non-cooperative single hop and multi-hop schemes. In [14] and [15], the authors proposed a space-time coded cooperation to reduce energy consumption. In [16], the authors proposed a scheme to exploit transmit diversity in multi-hop WSN and showed the improvement in energy saving as the number of hops increased when end-to-end outage probability is fixed.

In [17], the authors proposed an energy efficient chain based routing protocol for wireless sensor networks to minimize energy consumption, transmission delay and energy-delay cost. In [18], the authors proposed an Energy Balancing Cluster Head (EBCH) in WSN to maintain minimum inter cluster energy consumption of the network by balancing the intra cluster load among the cluster heads.

In [19], the authors proposed a scheme to find the optimal relay nodes and their corresponding radio interfaces that minimize energy consumption while satisfying the end-to end packet deadline requirement. In [20], the authors jointly optimized the hop distance and the number of cooperating nodes to improve the energy efficiency in wireless ad hoc networks. They showed that the Cooperative Multiple Input Single Output (C-MISO) transmission is energy efficient compared with SISO transmission for higher values of path loss exponent. However, the authors considered the end-to-end bit error probability as the error probability for both the broadcast phase and cooperative phase. The authors ignored the impact of channel gain on the energy consumption. Though the authors addressed the effect of bit error probability, they obtained a fixed number of cooperating nodes and optimal distance for a given bit error probability requirement and thus lack flexibility.

In [21], the authors proposed an energy-efficient network cooperation scheme to reduce the power consumption of secondary transmissions while maintaining the performance of primary transmissions. In [22], the authors proposed a protocol using cognitive relaying to provide continuous connections for target users and to minimize the outage probability of transmissions though optimal allocation of time slots.

In [23], the authors proposed efficient spectrum sensing strategies to reduce sensing overhead and to mitigate the interference to primary users in cognitive radio network. In [24], the authors proposed an energy efficient cooperative model for multicell multiantenna cooperative cellular networks. They analyzed the model under different cooperative transmission scenarios, channel conditions and interference levels. The authors achieved significant improvement in energy efficiency and outage probability performance.

In [25], the authors proposed an energy efficient cooperative algorithm to effectively take the relaying decision. They investigated the influence of transmission distance, number of receive nodes on the energy consumption of cooperative MIMO. The authors also demonstrated the influence of number of relay nodes on the energy consumption and saved energy about 10% than direct transmission.

In [26], the authors proposed a metric to select an appropriate next relay cluster for energy efficient CC in WSN. The authors have taken the circuit energy consumption into consideration for optimizing the energy consumption per unit transmission distance. However, the authors have neglected the influence of intra cluster error probability by assuming it as error free. The authors also failed to address the network life time issue by selecting a far away cluster. In [8], the authors investigated the energy consumption of various configurations such as SISO, Single Input Multiple Output (SIMO), Multiple Input Single Output (MISO) and MIMO in WSN. The authors configured a route which consumes minimum energy by selecting the best configuration for each hop. However, the authors assumed same bit error probability for intra cluster and inter cluster transmission to maintain the end to end reliability. Moreover, the authors fixed the inter hop distance irrespective of the cooperating nodes, leading to inefficient utilization of energy.

In [9], the authors investigated the energy efficiency of cooperative communication in WSN. The authors used optimal broadcast bit error probability and optimal number of cooperating nodes to minimize the energy consumption. However, the authors fixed the inter hop distance irrespective of the cooperating nodes. Hence, a strategy which determines the optimal transmission distance which minimizes the total energy consumption by taking the bit error probability of broadcast and cooperative phase and circuit energy consumption into account while satisfying the end to end reliability and data rate requirements is yet to be proposed.

3. System Model

3.1 Multihop C-MISO Scheme

A densely populated WSN which consists of thousands of sensor nodes is considered. The nodes are stationary and each node has single omni directional antenna with communication range of radius d. The nodes are randomly located according to a uniform distribution with a node density [rho]. It is further assumed that the transmission between WSN nodes are perfectly synchronized [14] and the channel is a flat Rayleigh fading channel. The data are modulated by 4-QAM and transmitted to a remote sink through multi-hop cooperative transmission.

The Fig. 1 shows the system model and describes a typical dual hop C-MISO communication. The transmission in each hop can be divided into two phases: broadcast phase (i.e local communication) and cooperative phase (i.e. long haul communication). During broadcast phase, the Source Node (SN) broadcasts its data to the neighbouring nodes. The nodes which are within the broadcast distance [d.sub.b] ([d.sub.b] [less than or equal to] 8 m [8]) are regarded as neighbours and those neighbour nodes which are willing to participate in the cooperative transmission are regarded as Cooperating Nodes (CNs). During cooperative phase, the CNs encode the received data using distributed STBC and simultaneously transmit to the relay node (i.e. inter hop node).

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

The Inter hop Node (IN) decodes the information and broadcasts to the neighbor nodes that are willing to take part in the cooperative transmission. The Inter hop nodes are selected, such that the hop distance d is equal to 100 m in the existing work. However, in the proposed work the Inter hop nodes are selected based on the derived optimal distance equation. Out of the many sensor nodes available in the cooperation range, the cooperative nodes are selected randomly. The CNs of the IN encode the received data using distributed STBC and simultaneously transmit to the next relay node. This process is repeated until the Destination Node (DN) is reached. Nodes CN1, CN2 and CN3 are the CNs of SN and CN4, CN5 and CN6 are the CNs of IN.

3.2 Minimization of Energy Consumption

In this paper, the energy model proposed in [6] and followed in [8] is used. Based on [6], the power consumption of the power amplifier is given by

[P.sub.ampl] = (1 + [alpha])[P.sub.tx] (1)

where [P.sub.ampl] is the power consumption of all the power amplifiers, [P.sub.tx] the power required for transmission and [alpha] is the modulation and power amplifier dependent parameter which is given by

[alpha] = ([xi]/[eta]) - 1 (2)

where [eta] is the drain efficiency of the power amplifier and [xi] is the modulation dependent peak to average ratio which is given by

[xi] = 3 M - 2 [square root of M] + 1/M -1 (3)

where M = [2.sup.b] is the size of the constellation and b is the number of bits used to represent a symbol. The transmission power [P.sub.tx] of equation (1) is given by

[P.sub.tx] = [[bar.E].sub.bt] [R.sub.b] x [(4[pi]).sup.2] [d.sup.k]/[G.sub.t][G.sub.r][[lambda].sup.2] [M.sub.l] [N.sub.f] (4)

where [[bar.E].sub.bt] is the energy required per bit at the receiver for a given bit error probability requirement, [R.sub.b] is the bit rate, d is the transmission distance, [G.sub.t] is the transmitter antenna gain, [G.sub.r] is the receiver antenna gain, [lambda] is the carrier wavelength, [M.sub.l] is the link margin and [N.sub.f] is the receiver noise figure. The total power consumption by all other circuit blocks except power amplifier is given by

[P.sub.ckt] [approximately equal to] [N.sub.t] ([P.sub.DAC] + [P.sub.mix] + [P.sub.filt]) + 2[P.sub.syn] + [N.sub.r] ([P.sub.LNA] + [P.sub.mix] + [P.sub.IFA] + [P.sub.ADC] + [P.sub.filr]) (5)

where [N.sub.t] is the number of transmitting nodes and [N.sub.r] is the number of receiving nodes. Table 1 lists the system parameters as in [6].

Equation (5) is represented in terms of energy consumption of the transmitter circuit blocks [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and energy consumption of the receiver circuit blocks [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] as

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (6)

where [sup.B] is the transmission bandwidth and

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (7)

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (8)

The value of [N.sub.t] is considered as 1 for broadcast phase and as N for cooperative phase. The value of [N.sub.r] is considered as N for broadcast phase and as 1 for cooperative phase. The bit error probability for M -ary QAM [P.sub.MQAM] with transmit and receive diversity is given by equation (9) as in [8]

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (9)

where [[parallel]x[parallel].sub.2] is the Frobenius norm, [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is the channel gain matrix and [N.sub.0] is the noise power. By substituting equation (4) in equation (9) and after making necessary rearrangements, the energy consumption per bit [E.sub.bt] is given by equation (10) as in [8]

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (10)

In C-MISO system, during local transmission, the source node or inter hop node transmits its data to the cooperating nodes with the transmit energy consumption [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], which is computed using equation (10) by considering [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is given by

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (11)

where [d.sub.b] is the broadcast distance, [P.sub.b] is the bit error probability of the broadcast phase, [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is the channel gain of the broadcast phase with [N.sub.t] = 1 and [N.sub.r] = 1. When the number of sensor nodes participating in the cooperation is N, then the total energy consumption for local communication is given by

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (12)

where [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] are given by equations (7) and (8).

During the long haul communication, all the N CNs transmit their data to the next inter hop node or destination node with the transmit energy consumption [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], which is computed using equation (10) by considering [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and is given by

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (13)

where [d.sub.c] is the long haul transmission distance, [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is the channel gain of the cooperative phase with [N.sub.t] = N and [N.sub.r] = 1, and [P.sub.c] is the bit error probability of the cooperative phase. Thus, the total energy consumption for long haul communication is given by

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (14)

The total energy consumption for a single hop ([MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) is the sum of the energy consumption for local communication and long haul communication. Hence, Ec is obtained by adding equations (12) and (14) as

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (15)

where [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

By substituting equations (11) and (13) in equation (15) and rearranging, we get the total energy consmption for a single hop [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] as

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (16)

where

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

Based on [9], the end to end bit error probability [P.sub.e] is represented in terms of [P.sub.b] and [P.sub.c] as

[P.sub.e] = 1 - (1 - [P.sub.b])(1 - [P.sub.c]) (17)

[approximately equal to] [P.sub.b] + [P.sub.c] (18)

[approximately equal to] [P.sub.b] + ([P.sub.e] - [P.sub.b]) (19)

By substituting [P.sub.c] = [P.sub.e] - [P.sub.b] in equation (16), the total energy consumption for a single hop [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is given by

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (20)

The total energy consumption [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is minimized by taking partial derivation of equation (20) with respect to [P.sub.b] and equating it to zero

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (21)

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (22)

By substituting the values of [C.sub.2] and [C.sub.3] in equation (22) and cancelling the like term yields,

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. (23)

The number of nodes within a circle of radius d with a WSN of node density [rho] is given by N = [pi][d.sup.2.sub.b][rho]

i.e. [d.sub.b.sup.2] = N/[pi][rho] (24)

On substituting equation (24) in equation (23), with N = [N.sub.t] and k = 2, since the broadcast distance is small, the equation (23) becomes

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (25)

From equation (25), the optimal broadcast bit error probability Pb is given by

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (26)

From equation (25), the optimal long haul distance [d.sub.Pbopt] is given by

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (27)

The [d.sub.Pbopt] is the long haul distance [d.sub.c] with optimal broadcast bit error probability and minimum total energy consumption. The [d.sub.Pbopt] also depends on the channel path loss exponent, the node density and the number of cooperating nodes which determines the size of the channel gain matrix.

The Fig. 2 shows effect of number of nodes N on the total transmit energy, total circuit energy and total energy consumption per bit for fixed distance case with [d.sub.c] = 100 m.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

From the figure, it is clear that as the number of nodes N increases, the total circuit energy consumption increases linearly with N, the total transmit energy consumption decreases exponentially with N. The total energy consumption decreases and reaches a minimum value at N = 5, and then increases. At N = 5, the total transmit energy consumption is approximately equal to the total circuit energy. From Fig. 2, it is clear that cooperative communication is energy efficient if total transmit energy consumption is approximately equal to the total circuit energy.

3.3 Algorithm for Energy Minimization

The algorithm can be initiated by the source node or any other controller node of the network. For the given [P.sub.e], the algorithm selects a [P.sub.b] which is lower than [P.sub.e] and roughly in the range-from 1/10th of [P.sub.e] to 1/100th of [P.sub.e]. Choosing a value for [P.sub.b] above 1/10th of [P.sub.e] results in more number of CNs (greater than 10) and choosing a value below 1/100th of [P.sub.e] results in CNs less than 2. The [P.sub.c] is determined using equation (18). The algorithm for energy minimization in the form of pseudocode is given below.
Algorithm : Total energy minimization
       1. Initialize the parameters required for energy calculation
          such as end to end bit
          error probability [P.sub.e], broadcast bit error probability
          [P.sub.b] which is slightly lower than
          [P.sub.e] and bit error probability of the cooperative
          phase [P.sub.c]
       2. For i [left arrow] 2 to N
          Do calculate the total circuit energy as [MATHEMATICAL
          EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] using (7) and (8)
         (i) Calculate the local transmission distance [d.sub.b]
            using (24)
         (ii) Calculate the local transmit energy [MATHEMATICAL
           EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] using (11)
         (iii) Calculate the long haul distance [d.sub.c] using (27)
         (iv) Calculate the long haul transmit energy [MATHEMATICAL
           EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] using (13) with
           [N.sub.t] = i
         (v) Compare the total circuit energy with the total
           transmit energy
             If the total circuit energy is approximately equal to
               the total transmit energy
             Then choose the N as [N.sub.Pbopt], choose the [d.sub.c]
               as [d.sub.Pbopt]
             Else go to step 2
             End
          End

Algorithm: Pseudocode for energy minimization.


Initially, by considering the value of N as 2, the algorithm calculates the total circuit energy, local transmit energy, long haul transmission distance and long haul transmit energy. It then compares total transmit energy with the total circuit energy. If the total transmit energy is approximately equal to the total circuit energy, the algorithm stops. The value of N is [N.sub.Pbopt] and the corresponding [d.sub.c] is the [d.sub.Pbopt]. Otherwise, the value of N is incremented by one and the whole process of energy computation and comparison is repeated.

4. Simulation Results

The CMISO system is simulated using the simulation parameters listed in Table 2. The nodes are randomly deployed according to uniform probability distribution and the source and destination are randomly selected.

For a given broadcast error probability [P.sub.b] = 0.73 x [10.sup.-4] and end to end bit error probability [P.sub.e] = [10.sup.-3], the number of CNs N is varied from 2 to 10 and total circuit energy and total transmit energy per bit is computed and shown in Fig. 3. [N.sub.Pbopt] is the minimum value of N for which total transmit energy is approximately equal to the total circuit energy.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

From Fig. 3, the optimum number of co-operating nodes [N.sub.Pbopt] is equal to 4. For [N.sub.Pbopt] = 4, the optimal distance [d.sub.Pbopt] is computed and is given by [d.sub.Pbopt] = 75 m. For [d.sub.Pbopt] = 75 m, the total energy consumption per bit for both SISO & C-MISO is calculated and tabulated in Table 3.

From the Table 3, it is evident that C-MISO is energy efficient than SISO.

For a given [N.sub.Pbopt] = 2, the end to end error probability [P.sub.e] is varied and the corresponding [d.sub.Pbopt], and long haul transmit energy [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is computed. The long haul transmit energy, [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] signed as ([MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) in Fig. 4.

The simulation is repeated for [N.sub.Pbopt] = 4, 6 and 8. From Fig. 4, it is evident that for a given [N.sub.Pbopt], the long haul transmit energy [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] remains constant even if we decrease the end to end bit error probability [P.sub.e].

For a fixed [N.sub.Pbopt] = 2, the [P.sub.e] is varied and the long haul transmit energy consumption is calculated for a bit through single hop using equation (13) and is shown in Fig. 5. For a given [P.sub.e], [P.sub.b] is selected such that [N.sub.Pbopt] = 2. The experiment is repeated for [N.sub.Pbopt] = 4 and 6. It is observed that the energy required for transmission remains almost constant with decrease in [P.sub.e], since the transmission distance is decreased inorder to compensate for increase in transmit energy due to decrease in [P.sub.e]. It is also observed that for a given [P.sub.e], the transmit energy increases with [N.sub.Pbopt]. The reason is that the transmission distance increases as per equation (27) with increase in [N.sub.Pbopt] for a given [P.sub.e].

[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]

The variation in optimal broadcast error probability [P.sub.b] with respect to [P.sub.e] for a given [N.sub.Pbopt] is shown in Fig. 6. For a fixed [N.sub.Pbopt] = 2, the [P.sub.e] is varied and corresponding optimal broadcast error probability [P.sub.b] is selected such that [N.sub.Pbopt] = 2. The experiment is repeated for [N.sub.Pbopt] = 4 and 6. It is clear from the figure that the [P.sub.b] decreases with decrease in [P.sub.e] for a given [N.sub.Pbopt]. It is also clear from the figure that for a given [P.sub.e], decrease in [P.sub.b] cause the [N.sub.Pbopt] to decrease.

[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]

The Table 4 gives the simulation results for the total energy consmption for two different cases by varying the end to end bit error probability [P.sub.e]. For both the cases 20,000 bits are transmitted from source to destination with [d.sub.SD] = 300 m.

Traditional fixed distance case :

The total energy consumption is calculated for SISO and CMISO (4 x 1) with fixed hop distance d = 100 m [8] (d > [d.sub.Pbopt]). The simulation is repeated by varying the end to end bit error probability [P.sub.e].

Proposed optimal distance case :

For each [P.sub.e], the optimal distance [d.sub.Pbopt] is computed (i.e. d = 75 m, 64 m and 56 m for [P.sub.e] = [10.sup.-3], [10.sup.-5] and [10.sup.-7] respectively). The total energy consumption is calculated for SISO and CMISO (4 x 1) with [d.sub.Pbopt]. Fig. 7 shows the energy consumption for these two cases.

[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]

Fig. 8 compares the number of times a relay node can participate in the transmission of 20000 bits of data for the traditional fixed hop distance and the proposed case with optimal hop distance. It is clear from the Fig. 8 that the number of participations for the proposed case is higher than traditional case.

[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]

Finally, the performance of the proposed case is compared with the traditional fixed distance case using energy delay product as the metric in Fig 9. The energy delay product is the product of the total energy consumed in the process of transmitting the data from source to the destination and the number of hops required to reach the destination from source.

[FIGURE 9 OMITTED]

The delay incurred is dependent on the number of hops. More number of hops results in more amount of delay. The delay cost associated with the local information exchange also increases. Hence, for the cooperative transmission to be energy efficient and delay efficient, it requires lower EDP. The figure shows the EDP for two cases. The case (i) is the traditional fixed distance with d > [d.sub.Pbopt] (i.e. d = 100 m [8] irrespective of [P.sub.e]) and case (ii) is the proposed work with d = [d.sub.Pbopt] (i.e. d = 75 m, 64 m and 56 m for [P.sub.e] = [10.sup.-3], [10.sup.-5] and [10.sup.-7] respectively). For a fixed [N.sub.Pbopt] = 4, the [P.sub.e] is varied and corresponding optimal broadcast error probability [P.sub.b] is selected such that NPbopt = 4. To transmit the data through the source to destination distance [d.sub.SD] of 300 m, traditional case requires 3 hops. Whereas the number of hops required for the proposed case is 4 for [P.sub.e] = [10.sup.-3] and 5 for [P.sub.e] = [10.sup.-4] and [P.sub.e] = [10.sup.-5]. Though the traditional case requires less number of hops, it consumes more energy than the proposed case and results in higher EDP. From the figure, it is clear that the proposed case results in lower EDP and hence it is energy and delay efficient.

Fig. 10 shows the energy consumption of CMISO for the proposed and traditional fixed distance [[8], Jong-Moon Chung et al.] case. As in [8], the node density is varied from [rho] = 3 x [10.sup.-3] to 7 x [10.sup.-3]. The source to destination distance is fixed as [d.sub.SD] = 500 m. From source to destination, 20000 bits are transmitted with four cooperating nodes [N.sub.Pbopt] = 4. The bit error probability is fixed as [P.sub.e] = [10.sup.-3] for both broadcast and cooperative transmission. From the figure, it is clear that for all the node densities, the total energy consumption of the proposed case is significantly less when compared to the traditional fixed distance case [8] and hence proves to be energy efficient.

[FIGURE 10 OMITTED]

The proposed case achieves a marginal reduction in the energy consumption with increase in node density and the variation is significant between the node density [rho] = 6 x [10.sup.-3] and 7 x [10.sup.-3], where as the energy consumption remains constant for the traditional fixed distance case. The increase in node density increases the possibility of availability of nodes in best locations and decreases the average distance between the nodes. The amount of reduction in the average distance value between the nodes is insignificant when compared with the larger hop distance of the traditional case. Whereas, the amount of reduction in the average distance value between the nodes is marginally significant when compared with the comparatively smaller hop distance of the proposed case. In WSN, usually the nodes are deployed in larger numbers leading to higher node densities. Therefore, it is clear that the proposed case is energy efficient than the traditional case at all the node density values considered. It is also clear that the proposed case is more energy efficient at higher node densities when compared to lower node densities.

5. Conclusion

In this paper, an algorithm for energy efficient cooperative communication in WSN is proposed. The equations for optimal broadcast bit error probability and hence the optimal long haul distance that maximizes the energy efficiency is derived. The performance of the proposed scheme is evaluated in terms of energy and delay. The proposed scheme is compared with the traditional case. The simulation results show that the proposed scheme is both energy and delay efficient compared with traditional case. Since the proposed scheme is energy and delay efficient, it is suitable for real time applications.

http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3837/tiis.2016.07.012

References

[1] I. F. Akyildiz, W. Su, Y. Sankarasubramaniam and E.Cayirci, "Wireless sensor networks: a survey," Computer Networks, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 393-422, March, 2002. Article (CrossRef Link)

[2] A. Paulraj, R. Nabar and D. Gore, Introduction to space time wireless communications, Cambridge University press, Cambridge, UK, 2003. Article (CrossRef Link)

[3] S. M. Alamouti, "A simple transmit diversity technique for wireless communications," IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 1451- 1458, October, 1998. Article (CrossRef Link)

[4] V. Tarokh, H. Jafarkhani, and A. R. Calderbank, "Space-time block codes from orthogonal designs," IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 1456-1467, July, 1999. Article (CrossRef Link) Article (CrossRef Link)

[5] Hamid Jafarkhani, "A Quasi-Orthogonal Space-Time Block Code," IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 1-4, January, 2001. Article (CrossRef Link)

[6] Shuguang Cui, Andrea J. Goldsmith and Ahmad Bahai, "Energy efficiency of MIMO and cooperative MIMO techniques in sensor networks," IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 1089-1098, August, 2004. Article (CrossRef Link)

[7] Ritesh Madan, Shuguang Cui, Sanjay Lall and Andrea Goldsmith, "Cross-Layer design for lifetime maximization in inteference-limited wireless sensor networks," IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 5, no. 11, pp. 3142-3152, November, 2006. Article (CrossRef Link)

[8] Jong--Moon Chung, Joong Kim and Donghyuk Han, "Multihop Hybrid Virtual MIMO Scheme for Wireless Sensor Networks," IEEE Transactions on vehicular Technology, vol. 61, no. 9, pp. 4069-4078, November, 2012. Article (CrossRef Link)

[9] Deyu Zhang and Zhigang Chen, "Energy efficiency of cooperative communication with guaranteed E2E reliability in WSNs," International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 2013, pp. 1-11, Article ID 532826. Article (CrossRef Link)

[10] Sudharman K. Jayaweera, "Virtual MIMO based Cooperative Communication for Energy--constrained Wireless Sensor Networks," IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 984-989, May, 2006. Article (CrossRef Link)

[11] G. N. Bravos and A.G. Kanatas, "Energy efficiency of MIMO-based sensor networks with a cooperative node selection algorithm", in Proc. of 2007 IEEE Int. Conf. Commun., pp. 3218-3223, 2007. Article (CrossRef Link)

[12] T. D. Nguyen, O. Berder and O. Sentieys, "Cooperative MIMO schemes optimal selection for wireless sensor networks," in Proc. of 2007 IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf., pp. 85-89, April, 2007. Article (CrossRef Link)

[13] Glauber Gomes de Oliveria Brante, Marcos Tomio Kakitani, and Richard Demo Souza, "Energy efficiency analysis of some cooperative and non-cooperative transmission schemes in wireless sensor networks," IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 59, no. 10, pp. 2671-2677, October, 2011. Article (CrossRef Link)

[14] Behrouz Maham, Are Hjorungnes, and Ravi Narasimhan, "Energy-efficient space time coded cooperation in outage-restricted multihop wireless networks," IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 59, no. 11, pp. 3111-3121, November, 2011. Article (CrossRef Link)

[15] Ding Jie, Liu Dan-Pu, and Wu Hua-ri, "Energy efficiency of virtual MIMO transmission schemes for cluster-based wireless sensor networks," The Journal of china universities of posts and telecommunications, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 31-38, August, 2011. Article (CrossRef Link)

[16] Aitor del coso, Umberts Spagnolini and Christian Ibars, "Cooperative distributed MIMO channels in wireless sensor networks," IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 402-414, February, 2007. Article (CrossRef Link)

[17] Razieh Sheikhpour and Sam Jabbehdari, "An energy efficient chain-based routing protocol for wireless sensor networks," KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 1357-1378, June, 2013. Article (CrossRef Link)

[18] Bhagyalakshmi Lakshminarayanan and Murugan Krishnan, "Avoiding energy holes problem using load balancing approach in wireless sensor network," KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 1618-1637, May, 2014. Article (CrossRef Link)

[19] HyungJune Lee, "Joint radio selection and relay scheme through optimization model in multi-radio sensor networks," KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 4451-4466, December, 2014. Article (CrossRef Link)

[20] Jun Zhang, Li Fei, Qiang Gao, and Xiao-Hong Peng, "Energy-efficient multihop cooperative MISO transmission with optimal hop distance in wireless ad hoc networks," IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 3426-3435, October, 2011. Article (CrossRef Link)

[21] Zeyang Dai, Jian Liu, Chonggang Wang and Keping Long, "Exploiting network cooperation for green communications in cognitive radio networks," in Proc. of wireless networking symposium, GLOBECOM2013, pp. 4554-4559, 2013. Article (CrossRef Link)

[22] Zeyang Dai, Jian Liu, Chonggang Wang and Keping Long, "Enhanced cognitive relaying for providing continous connections in wireless networks," IEEE Transactions on vehicular Technology, vol. 64, no. 7, pp. 3030-3042, July, 2015. Article (CrossRef Link)

[23] Zeyang Dai, Jian Liu, Chonggang Wang and Keping Long, "Selective-reporting based cooperative spectrum sensing strategies for cognitive radio networks," IEEE Transactions on vehicular Technology, vol. 64, no. 7, pp. 3043-3055, July, 2015. Article (CrossRef Link)

[24] Jing Zhang, Xi Yang, Qi Yao, Xiaohu Ge, Minho Jo and Guoqiang Mao, "Cooperative Energy efficieny modeling and performance analysis in co-channel interference cellular networks," The Computer Journal, vol. 56, no. 8, pp. 1010-1019, August, 2013. Article (CrossRef Link)

[25] Chen Chunkai, "Energy consumption analysis and algorithms based on energy efficiency for cooperative networks," Smart Computing Review, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 203-210, June, 2012. Article (CrossRef Link)

[26] Bin Li, Wenjie Wang, Qinye Yin, Rong Yang, Yubo Li and Chen Wang, "A new cooperative transmission metric in wireless sensor networks to minimize energy consumption per unit transmit distance," IEEE Communications letters, vol. 16, no. 5, May, 2012. Article (CrossRef Link)

K. Senthil Kumar (1) and R. Amutha (2)

(1) Non member, Associate Professor, Department of ECE, Rajalakshmi Engineering College, Thandalam, Tamil Nadu -602 105, India.

[e-mail: senthilkumar.kumaraswamy@rajalakshmi.edu.in]

(2) Non member, Professor, Department of ECE, SSN College of Engineering, Kalavakkam, Tamil Nadu -603 110, India.

[e-mail: amuthar@ssn.edu.in]

* Corresponding author: K. Senthil Kumar

Received February 11, 2015; revised August 18, 2015; revised March 19, 2016; accepted April 15, 2016; published July 31, 2016

K. Senthil Kumar is currently pursuing his Ph.D. at Anna University, Chennai, India. He received his Master Degree from Rajalakshmi Engineering College, Chennai in 2009. In the year 2002, he received his bachelor's degree in Engineering from Bharath Niketan Engineering College, Theni, which was affiliated to MK university, Madurai, India. His research interests include wireless communications, information & coding theory and MIMO wireless communication systems.

R. Amutha is an Engineer by qualification, have obtained her Doctorate in the year 2006 from Anna University, Chennai and Masters from PSG college of Technology and Bachelors in Electronics & Communication Engineering from Thiagarajar college of Engineering in the year 1987. She is presently working as a Professor in the department of ECE at SSN college of engineering, Chennai. Her research is WSN and coding theory.
Table 1. System Parameters

Symbol                             Parameter                  Value

[f.sub.c]                      Carrier frequency             2.4 GHz
[G.sub.t] x [G.sub.r]       Product of antenna gain           5 dBi
B                                  Bandwidth                 10 KHz
[N.sub.f]                    Receiver noise figure            10 dB
[eta]                   Drain efficiency of RF amplifier      0.35
k                          Channel path loss exponent        2 & 3.5
[P.sub.syn]                   Power consumption of            50 mW
                             frequency synthesizer

[P.sub.DAC]                 Power consumption of DAC         15.4 mW
[P.sub.ADC]                 Power consumption of ADC         6.7 mW
[P.sub.mix]                Power consumption of mixer        30.3 mW
[P.sub.LNA]                 Power consumption of LNA          20 mW
[P.sub.IFA]                 Power consumption of IFA          3 mW

[P.sub.filt]                  Power consumption of           2.5 mW
                             filter at transmitter

[P.sub.filr]                  Power consumption of           2.5 mW
                               filter at receiver

[N.sub.0]/2                       Noise power              -174 dBm/Hz
[M.sub.l]                         Link margin                 40 dB

Table 2. Simulation Parameters

Parameter                                              Value

Node density ([rho])                                   0.08
Distance between source and destination                300 m
  ([d.sub.SD])
Number of bits to be transmitted ([N.sub.i])         20 Kbits
Deployed Area                                  1000 x 1000 [m.sup.2]
Initial energy of a node                               100 J

Table 3. Comparison of per bit total energy consumption between SISO
& C-MISO for [d.sub.Pbopt] = 75 m

Total Energy Consumption per bit in J

SISO                        C-MISO

4.784 x [10.sup.-5]   2.595 x [10.sup.-5]

Table 4. Comparison of total energy consumption between SISO and
C-MISO under different end to end bit error probability [P.sub.e]
for end to end transmission of [N.sub.i] = 20,000 bits through
multiple hops with [N.sub.Pbopt] = 4 and [d.sub.SD] = 300 m.

                     Total energy consumption for end to end
End to end                   transmission in Joules
bit error
probability      Traditional case : d >       Proposed case : d =
[P.sub.e]              per hop               [d.sub.Pbopt] per hop
                     (d = 100 m)                 (d = 75 m,
                                               64 m and 56 m)

              SISO    C-MISO     Energy    SISO   C-MISO   Energy
                      4 x 1      Saving           4 x 1    Saving
[10.sup.-3]    50       32         18       40      21       19
[10.sup.-5]    95       47         48       65      27       38
[10.sup.-7]   139       64         75       66      30       36

Fig. 4. Optimal long haul transmission distance over end to end bit
error probability ePunder different number of optimal cooperating
nodes.

End to end bit error probability

                    [10.sup.-3]   [10.sup.-4]   [10.sup.-5]

[N.sub.Pbopt] = 8   (2.3)         (2.3)         (2.2)
[N.sub.Pbopt] = 4   (1.7)         (1.7)         (1.8)
[N.sub.Pbopt] = 6   (1.2)         (1.2)         (1.3)
[N.sub.Pbopt] = 2   (0.81         (0.78)        (0.8)

                    [10.sup.-6]   [10.sup.-7]   [10.sup.-8]

[N.sub.Pbopt] = 8   (2.3)         (2.3)         (2.2)
[N.sub.Pbopt] = 4   (1.8)         (1.7)         (1.8)
[N.sub.Pbopt] = 6   (1.2)         (1.3)         (1.2)
[N.sub.Pbopt] = 2   (0.75)        (0.75)        (0.77)

                    [10.sup.-9]

[N.sub.Pbopt] = 8   (2.2)
[N.sub.Pbopt] = 4   (1.7)
[N.sub.Pbopt] = 6   (1.2)
[N.sub.Pbopt] = 2   (0.79)

Note: Table made from line graph.
COPYRIGHT 2016 KSII, the Korean Society for Internet Information
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2016 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Kumar, K. Senthil; Amutha, R.
Publication:KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems
Article Type:Report
Date:Jul 1, 2016
Words:6902
Previous Article:Energy-aware preferential attachment model for wireless sensor networks with improved survivability.
Next Article:Distributed optimal path generation based on delayed routing in smart camera networks.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters