25.01.2014 Views

hybrid datagathering scheme for energy efficient wireless sensor ...

hybrid datagathering scheme for energy efficient wireless sensor ...

hybrid datagathering scheme for energy efficient wireless sensor ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

A Muthu Krishnan et al ,Int.J.Computer Technology & Applications,Vol 4 (1), 51-57<br />

ISSN:2229-6093<br />

heterogeneity in terms of node <strong>energy</strong> in <strong>wireless</strong><br />

<strong>sensor</strong> networks have been mentioned. It introduces<br />

different level of heterogeneity: 2-level, 3-level and multilevel<br />

in terms of the node <strong>energy</strong>. HEED is a clustering<br />

based data collection protocol, where the residual <strong>energy</strong><br />

of the node is used <strong>for</strong> the selection of cluster head. This<br />

method keeps the node from getting drained due to high<br />

data processing task. HEED only helps in reducing the<br />

excessive load, but the regular data transmission burden<br />

remains same. So significant <strong>energy</strong> saving is not possible.<br />

Moreover clustering burdens also may not reduced. HEED<br />

can achieve <strong>energy</strong> conservation only if the network is<br />

static. But our proposed <strong>scheme</strong> proved to be <strong>efficient</strong> in<br />

both the static and dynamic environments.<br />

PEGASIS (Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor<br />

In<strong>for</strong>mation Systems) [6], a near optimal chain-based<br />

protocol that is an improvement over LEACH. In<br />

PEGASIS, each node communicates only with a close<br />

neighbor and takes turns transmitting to the base station,<br />

thus reducing the amount of <strong>energy</strong> spent per round. In<br />

this paper, we describe PEGASIS, a greedy chain protocol<br />

that is near optimal <strong>for</strong> a data-gathering problem in <strong>sensor</strong><br />

networks. PEGASIS outper<strong>for</strong>ms LEACH by eliminating<br />

the overhead of dynamic cluster <strong>for</strong>mation, minimizing the<br />

distance non leader-nodes must transmit, limiting the<br />

number of transmissions and receives among all nodes, and<br />

using only one transmission to the BS per round. Nodes<br />

take turns to transmit the fused data to the BS to balance<br />

the <strong>energy</strong> depletion in the network and preserves<br />

robustness of the <strong>sensor</strong> web as nodes die at random<br />

locations. Distributing the <strong>energy</strong> load among the nodes<br />

increases the lifetime and quality of the network.<br />

PEGASIS again a cluster based protocol where an<br />

improvement of leach is obtained. PEGASIS<br />

communicates with its close neighbor and reaches the<br />

cluster head.<br />

SINA introduces a <strong>sensor</strong> in<strong>for</strong>mation networking<br />

architecture that facilitates querying, monitoring, and<br />

tasking of <strong>sensor</strong> networks [7]. SINA plays the role of a<br />

middleware that abstracts a network of <strong>sensor</strong> nodes as a<br />

collection of massively distributed objects. The SINA's<br />

execution environment provides a set of configuration and<br />

communication primitives that enable scalable and<br />

<strong>energy</strong>-<strong>efficient</strong> organization of and interactions among<br />

<strong>sensor</strong> objects. On top the execution environment is a<br />

programmable substrate that provides mechanisms to<br />

create associations and coordinate activities among <strong>sensor</strong><br />

nodes. Users then access in<strong>for</strong>mation within a <strong>sensor</strong><br />

network using declarative queries, or per<strong>for</strong>m tasks using<br />

programming scripts. SINA does not support dynamic<br />

switching between data-reporting <strong>scheme</strong>s. Whereas the<br />

proposed <strong>scheme</strong> involves Dynamic switching that<br />

enables context aware <strong>energy</strong> saving. So that unwanted<br />

sample transmission can be reduced during static duration<br />

and in<strong>for</strong>mation loss can be avoided during dynamic<br />

situations. The current systems are designed either based<br />

on time driven data gathering or based on event driven<br />

data gathering. Time driven data gathering guarantees<br />

high data accuracy at the cost higher <strong>energy</strong>. On the other<br />

hand event driven data gathering results in maximum<br />

<strong>energy</strong> conservation with a significant loss in data<br />

accuracy. So the existing WSN’s can assure either data<br />

accuracy or <strong>energy</strong> conservation. But in the users<br />

perspective both data accuracy and <strong>energy</strong> are the two<br />

IJCTA | Jan-Feb 2013<br />

Available online@www.ijcta.com<br />

most important Quality of Service parameters. The<br />

existing systems do not have the flexibility to switch<br />

between time driven data gathering and event driven data<br />

gathering, which results in unwanted or redundant data<br />

transmissions during time driven data gathering and<br />

in<strong>for</strong>mation and data pattern loss during event driven data<br />

gathering. Existing systems are mostly centralized<br />

systems, where decision making is done the central entity.<br />

This system suffers from destabilization problems during<br />

communication loss. There are some systems, which are<br />

cluster based data gathering systems. These systems also<br />

experience higher communication overheads during<br />

cluster <strong>for</strong>ming and cluster head selection. A new <strong>hybrid</strong><br />

system <strong>for</strong> data gathering is the need of the time. In the<br />

proposed method Nodes that detect an event of interest or<br />

those nodes that are likely to detect the event in the near<br />

future become engaged in a proactive data reporting<br />

through spatio-temporal correlation of data. Since no<br />

clustering is required, the over heads are completely<br />

avoided. The proposed work doesn’t rely on another node<br />

to reach the cluster. This will further improve the <strong>energy</strong><br />

efficiency. Here also the clustering overheads are reduced<br />

to a great extent.<br />

Methodology:<br />

The essential elements of the <strong>hybrid</strong> data-gathering<br />

protocol proposed [9] in this paper are that: 1) it switches<br />

dynamically between the event-driven data-reporting<br />

<strong>scheme</strong> and the time driven data-reporting <strong>scheme</strong>, and 2)<br />

<strong>sensor</strong> nodes that will detect the events in the near future,<br />

which typically are in close proximity to those nodes<br />

detecting the events, are also engaged in the time-driven<br />

data-reporting process.<br />

Fig.1. nodes in data reporting processs charecteristics<br />

Figure (1) illustrates the key protocol characteristics.<br />

Under normal conditions, <strong>sensor</strong> nodes respond only<br />

when the measured temperature is above 100 °C.<br />

However, once <strong>sensor</strong> nodes realize that the abnormal<br />

phenomenon is not transient (e.g., at tp and tx), they<br />

switch to the time-driven data-reporting <strong>scheme</strong> and<br />

continuously disseminate temperature data to an observer.<br />

Furthermore, they notify other nodes of their changes so<br />

that neighboring nodes continuously disseminate data as<br />

well. Similarly, when the temperature goes below 100 °C<br />

(e.g., at tq and ty), the nodes switch back to the eventdriven<br />

data-reporting <strong>scheme</strong>.<br />

53

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!