A Device and Routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc
networks
Vaidya Suyash Vilas #1, Prof. S.S.Patil*2
#
Department of Electronics and Telecommunication, Sinhgad Institute of Technology
suyash.vaidya90@gmail.com
#
Department of Electronics and Telecommunication, Sinhgad Institute of Technology
s.patil.sit@sinhgad.edu
Abstract:-
Energy efficient routing in ad hoc networks has
been the subject of intensive study in recent years.
Most work has been focused on residual battery
power related cost metrics for a homogeneous ad
hoc network, where all the nodes are considered
identical in terms of functioning and available
resources. In this paper, we propose a Device and
Energy Aware Routing protocol (DEAR) for a
heterogeneous wireless ad hoc network where there
exist two different classes of nodes, battery-powered
nodes and externally powered nodes. By embedding
both the energy and the device-type awareness into
the routing protocol, we force the externally
powered nodes to forward more traffic and perform
more routing functions than a battery-powered
node. The simulation results show that DEAR
protocol achieves better system lifetime when
compared to the conventional energy efficient
routing protocols.R2003ElsevierScience(USA).
Keywords— Cluster, load-balancing, mobility,
cluster head.
1. Introduction:-
Ad hoc networks are dynamically formed,
infrastructure-less, wireless multi-hop networks.
They can be deployed anywhere without the need for
any fixed infrastructure like base stations. The nodes
configure themselves into a network and
cooperatively maintain network connectivity. An
intermediate node is used to forward packets if two
nodes wishing to communicate are not within
transmitting range of each other. Hence each node
acts as a router and a host. The nodes discover multi-
hop routes to each other by exchanging topology
information in the form of control messages. These
networks are typically deployed where there is no
infrastructure available or reliable, and fast network
establishment and self-reconfiguration are required.
For example, soldiers in a battlefield can have
handsets to communicate with each other, or in
emergency situations like earthquakes where the
existing infrastructure has been destroyed, an ad hoc
network can instantly be deployed to aid in disaster
recovery. Sensor networks are a subclass of ad hoc.
Networks wherein a group of sensors capable of
making various measurements exchange information
with each other.MANET has various potential
applications. Some typical examples include
emergency search-rescue operations, meeting events,
conferences, and battlefield communication between
moving vehicles and soldiers. With the abilities to
meet the new demand of mobile computation, the
MANET has a very bright future. Cluster-based
routing is a solution to address nodes heterogeneity,
and to limit the amount of routing information that
propagates inside the network. The idea behind
clustering is to group the network nodes into a
number of overlapping clusters. Clustering makes
possible a hierarchical routing in which paths are
recorded between clusters instead of between nodes.
This increases the routes lifetime, thus decreasing the
amount of routing control overhead. Inside the cluster
one node that coordinates the cluster activities is
clusterhead (CH). Inside the cluster, there are
ordinary nodes also that have direct access only to
this one clusterhead, and gateways. Gateways are
nodes that can hear two or more clusterheads. By
replacing the nodes with clusters, existing routing
protocols can be directly applied to the network. Only
gateways and clusterheads participate in the
propagation of routing control/update messages. In
dense networks this significantly reduces the routing
overhead, thus solving scalability problems for
routing algorithms in large ad hoc networks.
Combined metrics based clustering or weighted
clustering algorithm [1,2] takes a number of metrics
into account for cluster configuration, including node
degree, residual energy capacity, moving speed, and
so on. One advantage of this clustering scheme is that
it can flexibly adjust the weighting factors for each
metric to adjust to different scenarios. In clustered ad
hoc networks, Clusterheads bear extra responsibility
of routing packets for others. If a cluster head has too
many neighbors it may become bottleneck, since it
has to perform routing related works of all of its
members [3]. There may exist some situations where
some regions of the network become overcrowded
(for example location near the speaker in a
conference) and the clusterheads lying in such
regions may be overloaded due to movement of some
nodes with in this area. The performance of the
network may degrade due to congestion and buffer
flow at the clusterheads. Authors proposed a new
technique for load sharing to relieve the clusterheads
from overload. Energy conservation is an important
issue in ad hoc networks as nodes are usually battery
powered. Even though a node may not have any
message of its own to transmit, its battery is drained
when it acts as a router and forwards packets for
other nodes. Unlike the microprocessor industry or
the communication hardware industry, where
computation capability or the line rate have been
continuously improved (regularly doubled every 18
months), battery technology has been relatively
unchanged for many years. The lifetime of the battery
imposes a limitation on the operation hours of an ad
hoc network. Research in energy-conserving
protocols in ad hoc networks has dramatically
increased recently. Researchers are investigating
energy conservation at every layer in the traditional
protocol stack, from the radio layer up to the
transport layer and application layer [7–9].
Significant energy savings have been achieved at the
physical layer, data link layer and network layer.
Low power electronics, energy efficient modulation,
and minimum transmission power level are some
basic approaches adopted at the radio layer. The
minimum transmitting power level is used to
maintain the link connectivity thus the power
efficiency is improved while the interference is
reduced [10].
2. Energy aware routing protocol:-
2.1. Maximum system lifetime routing metric.At the
network layer, power efficient routing protocols are
designed to select the best path such that the total
energy consumed is minimized or the system lifetime
is maximized. The shortest path algorithms are still
used but with other carefully designed power-aware
cost metrics instead of the simple hop count metric.
Power-aware metrics for determining routes with
various objectives have been proposed in[13]. One
metric that aims to maximize the life of all nodes in
the network is defined as follows: cj ¼X k 1 i¼1
fiðxiÞ; ð1Þ where cj is the cost of sending packet j
from node n1 to node nk via intermediate nodes
n2ynk1; xi represents the total energy expended by
node i so far and fiðxiÞ denotes the cost or weight of
node i: Since fi represents a node’s reluctance to
forward packets, we have chosen fiðxiÞ¼ 1 Eixi ;
ð2Þ where fiðxiÞ denotes the current cost of using
node i; xi denotes the energy expended by node i so
far (noting xi is time-varying), and Ei is the initial
energy of node i when the network is deployed. Thus,
fi is the reciprocal of the residual energy of node i:
Therefore, as the energy of a node decreases the cost
of using that node increases. The authors in [13]
presented some results using this metric in a shortest
path routing algorithm. However, they did not
implement it as a protocol. Following their lead, we
incorporate this metric as the link cost function into
the Distributed Bellman-Ford (DBF) routing protocol
for ad hoc networks. This implementation will be
referred to as the energy aware routing (EAR)
protocol for the rest of this paper (not to be confused
with the eavesdrop and register concept in sensor
networks). The benefit of EAR protocol comes from
the dynamic load balancing among different nodes.
The protocol needs to keep track of the changing link
costs in a timely fashion. A table-driven protocol
could gather this information actively while a source-
initiated routing protocol presents a large latency in
obtaining such changes. This is the reason for
implementing the poweraware metric in the DBF
protocol (the simplest of all table-driven routing
protocols). In order to reduce the routing overhead
generated by the table-driven protocol, our
implementation of DBF just sends periodic updates
of the routing table and does not trigger an update
whenever there is a change in the routing table.
2.2. Performance of EAR:-
Whenever multiple paths exist from a source to a The time from the time of network deployment to the
destination, EAR makes use of different paths and time of the first node failure was noted as the system
tends to balance the load by optimizing the residual lifetime. Each node had a transmission range of 1 k
energy. Hence, the system lifetime will be more than and thenodes were distributed over a rectangular
that obtained by using conventional routing region with minimum area of N2 k; where N is the
protocols. We evaluate its performance and compare number of nodes.
it with conventional ad hoc routing protocols by
simulation. All the simulations are implemented
within the GloMoSim library [20], which is a
scalable simulation environment for wireless network
systems. The traffic pattern is CBR traffic with each
packet 512 bytes long. The packet rate between each
source destination pair (a session) is generated
randomly from an exponential distribution with mean
equal to one packet per second. The number of nodes
and the number of sessions vary in each simulation
2.2.1. Effect of number of nodes:-
set. However, we made the configuration of each
The effect of the number of nodes N on the system
simulation identical when comparing with different
lifetime is studied in the first simulation set. For each
routing protocols. In our simulation, we consider the
N; nodes are placed randomly with the only
energy consumed by communication subsystems
constraint that there should be at least a few pairs of
only, as almost all the EAR protocols do. Each node
nodes with multiple paths between them. This is
was initialized with a fixed amount of energy/battery
because whenever there exists only a single path
reserve (20000 energy units) before network
between pairs of nodes, the minimum-hop path and
deployment. We assume that the cost for a node to
the minimum-cost (energy) path will be identical.
send or receive a packet can be modeled as the linear
Therefore, the performance of EAR will be the same
addition of the following two parts, a fixed cost
as that of DBF. The system lifetime for a particular N
associated with channel access cost and an
was obtained as the average over a number of
incremental cost proportional to the size of packet
simulations with different topologies. The results of
[21]. Since we use data packets of fixed size, we
the simulation on five different routing protocols are
further simplify the energy consumption model as
shown inFig. 1. It is observed that the system lifetime
that it takes twice the energy to transmit a packet
is the highest when EAR is used. It can also be
when compared to receiving a packet [11]. ]. Two
inferred from the trend-line shown in the figure that
units of energy were subtracted from a nodes battery
the system lifetime decreases with an increase in the
reserve for each packet transmission and one unit of
number of nodes. This is because the number of
energy was subtracted for every packet received at
messages that a node might forward as a router
MAC layer.
increases with an increase in the number of nodes
leading to a faster depletion of energy reserves. As
the number of nodes increases, it is expected that the
percentage increase in system lifetime between EAR
and DBF will increase. This is expected because as
the number of nodes increases, each node may have
more routes (to every other node) to choose from.
However, this statement cannot be generalized
because the area over which the network is deployed
is another parameter that affects the system lifetime.
If this area is kept constant, as the number of nodes
increases, nodes become crowded and many of them
are within transmission range of each other, i.e. the
connectivity of the network increases. Therefore, in
this case, as the number of nodes increases, each
node will be used as a router less frequently. Since
there are more single-hop transmissions from a
source node to a destination node, the performance of
EAR and DBF will start converging, and the
percentage increase of the system lifetime between
EAR and DBF will actually decrease with an increase
in the number of nodes. This is further explained in
the next section. However, in our simulation, we
examine the situation where the area over which the
network is deployed is also increased proportional to
the number of nodes increased in the system, e.g. we
keep the node density constant. As shown in Fig. 2,
in this case, the percentage increase in system time
with respect to DBF also increases with the
increasing of the number of nodes.
2.2.2. Effect of edge density:-
This simulation set studies the effect of edge density
on system lifetime. Any two nodes that can transmit
and receive messages directly without the use of an
intermediate node are said to have an edge between
them. The ratio of the number of edges in the
network and the number of edges in a fully connected
network with the same number of nodes is known as
edge density. The results are shown in Fig. 3. It is
observed that EAR again gives the highest system
lifetime. The system lifetime increases as the edge
density increases since the load is balanced over a
larger number of routes.
Ad hoc networks are dynamically formed,
infrastructure-less, wireless multi-hop networks.
They can be deployed anywhere without the need for
any fixed infrastructure like base stations.
3.LITERATURE REVIEW:-
A number of clustering algorithms for mobile ad hoc
networks have been proposed in the literature. In
Lowest ID cluster algorithm (LIC) [1] a node with
the minimum id is chosen as a clusterhead. Drawback
of lowest ID algorithm is that certain nodes are prone
to power drainage [2] due to serving as clusterheads
for longer periods of time. 3-hop between adjacent
clusterheads (3-hBAC) [3] algorithm introduce a new
node status, “clusterguest”. When a mobile node
finds out that it cannot serve as a clusterhead or join a
cluster as a clustermember, but some neighbor is a
clustermember of some cluster, it joins the
corresponding cluster as a clusterguest.
In LCC [4] the clustering algorithm is divided into
two steps: cluster formation and cluster maintenance.
The cluster formation simply follows LIC, i.e.
initially mobile nodes with the lowest ID in their
neighborhoods are chosen as clusterheads. Re-
clustering is event-driven and invoked if two cluster
heads move into the reach range of each other and
when a mobile node cannot access any cluster head.
Adaptive clustering for mobile wireless network [5]
ensures small communication overhead for building
clusters because each mobile node broadcasts only
one message for the cluster construction. An optimal
energy-efficient clustering method in wireless sensor
networks using multi-objective genetic algorithm [6]
is a multi-objective genetic algorithm (GA) whose
goal is to obtain clustering schemes in which the
network lifetime is optimized for different delay
values. A load balancing energy efficient clustering
algorithm [7] in this paper, the author proposed a
dynamic energy-efficient clustering algorithm that
prolongs the network lifetime by electing cluster-
heads taking into consideration, in addition to other
parameters such as mobility, their residual energies
and making them dynamically monitor their energy
consumption to either diminish the number of their
cluster-members or relinquish their roles. Energy
efficient routing in ad hoc networks has been the
subject of intensive study in recent years. Most work
has been focused on residual battery power related
cost metrics for a homogeneous ad hoc network,
where all the nodes are considered identical in terms
of functioning and available resources.
 PROPOSED METHODOLOGY:-
In weighed cluster algorithm [1] the selection of
clusterhead is performed after considering a number
of performance parameters including degree
difference, distance with neighbors, mobility of
nodes and remaining battery power. The proposed
work “Load Sharing in Weighted Clustering
Algorithm (LS-WCA)” follow the clusterhead
selection procedure given in WCA.
3.1 Cluster head selection:-
The parameters considered for clusteread selection
are described below
3.1.1 Degree Difference:-
In cluster-based structure a performance parameter
for load balancing is degree difference (Δv) [1], for
each node v which is defined as the difference of
ideal node degree (δ) and actual degree (connectivity)
of that node. Degree of node (dv) is the number of
neighbors of node v that are in the transmission
range. Ideal degree is the number of neighbors that a
cluster head can handle effectively.
3.1.2 Energy Consumption:-
Cluster head has to perform extra task for routing
and forwarding the packets, so it is more prone to
energy drainage. More power is needed for
communicating long distant neighbors. In mobile ad
hoc network nodes communicate with each other
through the wireless channel, the Friis transmission
equation is as follows
Where, Pt is transmitted power and Pr is power at
the receiving antenna, Gt and Gr are the antenna
gains, λ is the wavelength used and R is the distance
between the nodes. Energy-consumption of a node is
directly proportional to the distance of that node with
its neighbors. Sum of distance to all neighbors (Sdv)
is found as
Where (xv, yv) and (xk, yk) are the coordinates of the
node v and node k respectively. Summation is done
for all neighbors k of node v. The parameter “Sum of
distances” is used for energy consumption at the time
of clusterhead selection.
3.1.3 Mobility:-
Mobility or stability is an important factor in
deciding the clusterheads. In order to avoid frequent
clusterhead changes, it is desirable to elect a
clusterhead that does not move very quickly. When
the clusterhead moves fast, the nodes may be
detached from the clusterhead and as a result, a
reaffiliation occurs. Reaffiliation can increase
computation and processing, which is not a desirable
feature [1]. The running average of the speed for
every node till current time T gives a measure of
mobility and is denoted by Mv, as
3.1.4 Power
A clusterhead consumes more battery than an
ordinary node because it has extra responsibilities. It
can estimate the remaining battery power by the
amount of time spent by the node as a clusterhead.
The parameter Pv is the cumulative time of a node
being a clusterhead. Pv is used to measure how much
battery power has been consumed by the node [1].
Higher the value of Pv lower the remaining battery
power. All four parameters (Δv ,Sdv, Mv ,and Pv, )
explained above can be used as a performance matrix
for selection of a node as a clusterhead. Weight of
these parameters can change according to
requirement.
Weighing factors are chosen in such a way that
W1+ W2+ W3+ W4 = 1
Combined weight of a node Wv is calculated as
follows
Wv = W1. Δv + W2.Sdv+W3.Mv + W4.Pv REFERENCES:-
[1] M. Gerla and J. T. Tsai (1995), “Multiuser,
Each node calculates its weight and broadcasts it Mobile, Multimedia RadioNetwork” Wireless
periodically in a hello packet to all nodes in its Networks, vol. 1, pp. 255–65.
transmission range. When a node receives the [2] A.D. Amis, R. Prakash, T.H.P Vuong, D.T.
weights of its 1-hop neighbors, it inserts them in the Huynh (2000) "Max-Min DCluster Formation in
possible CH set, which includes all potential cluster- Wireless Ad Hoc Networks" In proceedings of IEEE
heads. Conference on Computer Communications
(INFOCOM), vol. 1. pp. 32-41.
CONCLUSIONS
[3] J. Y. Yu and P. H. J. Chong (2003), “3hBAC (3-
“Ad hoc network” is a topic of interest because
hop between Adjacent Clusterheads): a Novel Non-
there is no prior investment for fixed infrastructures,
overlapping Clustering Algorithm for Mobile Ad Hoc
it can be easily deployed in a short time, and end
Networks” in proceedings of IEEE Pacrim’2003, vol.
users can access and manipulate data anytime and
1, pp. 318–21.
anywhere. This research paper presented energy
[4] C.-C. Chiang (1997), “Routing in Clustered
aware and load balancing technique of clustering
Multihop, Mobile Wireless Networks with Fading
(LS-WCA) for mobile ad hoc networks. Though
Channel” in proceedings of IEEE SICON.
clustering provides a good technique to reduce the
[5] C. R. Lin and M. Gerla (1997), “Adaptive
control overhead in scalable ad hoc networks but
Clustering for Mobile Wireless Networks” IEEE
there is always a chance of bottleneck formation at
JSAC, vol. 15, pp. 1265–75.
the selected clusterheads. This bottleneck can
[6] Peiravi, A., Mashhadi, H. R. and HamedJavadi, S.
degrade the performance ofthe network. Our
(2013), An optimal energy-efficient clustering
proposed technique LS-WCA subdivide the
method in wireless sensor networks using multi-
overloaded cluster in two clusters and the head of the
objective genetic algorithm. Int. J. Commun. Syst.,
disjoined cluster is chosen by considering the power
vol. 26(1), pp. 114-126, doi: 10.1002/dac.1336.
consumption during communication and weight
[7] Safa, H. and Mirza, O. (2010), A load balancing
values of the nodes. Since more power is needed to
energy efficient clustering algorithm for MANETs.
communicate at large distance, the farthest away
Int. J. Commun. Syst., 23: 463–483. doi:
node with suitable weight is assigned as the new
10.1002/dac.1084.
clusterhead. Uniform distribution of the load on the
selected clusterheads can improve the performance in
terms of PDF, throughput, E2E delay and Load
balancing. A clusterhead consumes more battery than
an ordinary node because it has extra responsibilities.
It can estimate the remaining battery power by the
amount of time spent by the node as a clusterhead.
The parameter Pv is the cumulative time of a node
being a clusterhead. Pv is used to measure how much
battery power has been consumed by the node [1].
Higher the value of Pv lower the remaining battery
power. Ad hoc networks are dynamically formed,
infrastructure-less, wireless multi-hop networks.
They can be deployed anywhere without the need for
any fixed infrastructure like base stations The nodes
configure themselves into a network and
cooperatively maintain network connectivity.