IPASJ International Journal of Computer Science (IIJCS)

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJCS/IIJCS.htm

A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijcs@ipasj.org
Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 ISSN 2321-5992

IMPROVISED OPPORTUNISTIC ROUTING

FOR UNDERWATER WIRELESS SENSOR
NETWORKS
2
Mohd Mujeebuddin, 1Md Ateeq Ur Rahman
2
SCET, Hyderabad,

1
Professor, Dept of CSE, SCET, Hyderabad,

Abstract
In the recent years, Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks (UWSNs) has attracted the wireless research communities. Resource
Discovery (RD) and Ocean monitoring are the two concepts explored by the researchers. In order to achieve successful packet
delivery ratio, the constraints in acoustic communication channel has to be explored. This paper concentrates over devising
opportunistic routing protocols using acoustic communication channel.Improved opportunistic routing protocols takes
advantage of distributed beaconing, constructs the adjacency graph at each hop and selects a forwarding set that holds the best
trade-off between reliability and energy efficiency. The unique feature of an improved opportunistic routing is the selection of
accurate next-hop forwarder nodes which trade-off the node configuration issue. Our simulation result shows that improved
opportunistic routing works better than prior routing protocols, GOR in terms of reduced packet loss, energy consumption, end-
to-end delay and propagation deviation factor.
Keywords:Underwater wireless sensor networks, Resource discovery, Ocean monitoring, Acoustic communication
channel, and Opportunistic routing
I. INTRODUCTION

Wireless sensor networks (WSN) are an acquisition of wireless sensors nodes that supervises environmental changes
without any centralized control over infrastructure [1]. Nowadays, several studies has been conducted to develop sensor
hardware and network infrastructure for different sort of applications. Prior WSNs requirements didnt satisfy the
needs of all applications. Network parameters like sensing range, transmission range and node density have to be
selectively chosen for an effective network performances. Underwater sensor network is a branch of study in Wireless
Sensor Networks (WSN). It is a sensor network which composed of different sensor nodes with acoustic transceivers.
The role of acoustic transceivers is to build communication path between sensing areas from shallow water and oceans.
The applications of UWSNs are numerous that majorly helps to monitor the oceans environmental changes. In order to
achieve better performances, the network parameters have to be devised regularly [2].
Resource discovery is an essential goal of the Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks. It is analyzed for dependency
rate of land resources. The networks maintenance of the UWSNs is a daunting task which eventually poses cost
maximization analysis. It is the recent study that impressed the research communities. The radio waves explored from
underwater is used for gathering the events took place in ocean [3].The specific data are collected using acoustic
transmission model. The sink transmits the acquired information to the monitoring center for further investigation. The
major challenge persist in UWSNs is data forwarding in the area of node movements, low bandwidth, propagation
speed and cost. Since the Global Positioning System (GPS) [4]cant be used in underwater environment. In addition to,
the deployed nodes are dynamic that states unaware about the position of the nodes.
Similarly, the communication quality of the channel also varies under pressure, temperature and salinity. In some
cases, the bandwidth consumption of nodes may varythat also reduces the channel quality. The available nodes in
UWSNs are mutually connected, if the decoding process is efficiently designed. Energy consumption [5] of the
underwater sensor nodes is predicted to be higher usage. Thus, routing protocols are also plays a vital role in
Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks. Opportunistic routing is the novel sort of routing protocols that deployed for
increasing the transmission capability. When a set of candidate nodes are transmitting the packets to the nodes which
are out of range, will fail to capture the information about the transmitting nodes. Higher priorities nodes are formed
as the set of forwarding nodes.

Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 Page 55

 IPASJ International Journal of Computer Science (IIJCS)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJCS/IIJCS.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijcs@ipasj.org
Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 ISSN 2321-5992

The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section II describes the related work; Section III describes the
proposed work; Section IV describes the experimental analysis and results and concludes in Section V.
II. RELATED WORK

This section presents the prior works carried out by other researchers.Variety of routing protocols is available for
UWSNs to overcome from the issues like long propagation delay, low data rate and high error probability. The
geographic routing protocols are designed for UWSNs in VBF. The VBF [6] is used for delivering the packets from
source to destination in vector. The range R is defined for each nodes and the packets are transferred to the nodes
within range. Localization service is used for obtaining the information about sensor node. E-PULRP is energy
efficient routing protocols that depict the energy maintenance between intermediate relay nodes and packet
transmission. To effectively select the relay node, the time intervals taken by neighboring nodes are used for energy
consumption and received signal strength. Reverse Localization Scheme (RLS) [7]is a 3D centralized localization
model for mobile underwater wireless sensor networks.
Other routing protocol, Depth Based Routing (DBR) is used for predicting the location of the nodes. Sink node gets
the details about sonobuoy drifted at each surface. Using greedy algorithm, the forwarded node with lowest pressure is
elected as the neighboring node. The delay sensitive based applications in UWSNs have to be focused for routing
algorithm development [8]. Minimization of the energy level is also a serious issue. An energy model is developed for
the optimal packet size and redundancy for underwater communication. Relied upon the underwater communications,
transmission power of each sensor node is adjusted. To manage the power of each sensor node,Multi-path Power
control Transmission scheme (MPT) is designed.
Vector based communication model was deployed to eliminate the void area of the communication channel. Vector
based void avoidance (VBVA) is suggested for vector based communication model. It suggested two approaches, vector
shift and back pressure that investigate over the convex and concave voids. The recovery process of those failed nodes
is a daunting task. A time series model was used for packet dropping avoidance in the concave hole. Relative Distance
Based Forwarding (RDBF) is an alternate routing protocol that depicts the location based coordinates [9]. Relied upon
the geographical distance to the sink node, the relay nodes are selected and processed. Then, a threshold value is
defined to every geometric shape of those forwarding nodes. RDBF also suffers from the high bit error rate, because it
mostly relies on the nodes with the shortest path to the sink. In addition, RDBF does not represent a recovery mode to
deal with the packets that are stuck in a local maxima node.
In other group of research, depth information is employed for routing the packets towards the destinations.DBR is
the first depth-based routing protocol proposed for UWSNs. Nevertheless, forwarding set selection will not performed
in an optimal way (having the duplicated packets problem), and neither proposes any recovery method to solve the void
problem. Depth-Based Multi-hop Routing (DBMR) and Energy-Efficient Depth-Based Routing (EEDBR) [10] are also
proposed in this category, which consider the residual energy of the nodes in their forwarding set selection; however,
they still provide no solution for the local maxima nodes.
III. PROPOSED WORK
This section depicts working of ourproposed model. The proposed algorithm contains four phases which is explained
as follows:
a) Topology creation:

Let us consider a number of sensor nodes n and number of sonobuoys nodes Sn are deployed in 2265 * 1000 sizes.
According to the individual sensor nodes, the data packets are generated using Poisson process.Poisson process is the
simple and widely used stochastic process that models the packet delivery over particular period of time. The
probability of packets arrival over period of time is estimated using poisson process under low traffic load.The packet
transmission range is from max 5 m/s to min 2.70 m/s. Node transmission range is given as 250m with data rate of
50kbps. Relied upon the payload size and space taken for next hop forwarder set, the size of the packet is determined.
b) Enhanced beaconing:

Beaconing is the recovery process used in packet transmission systems. GEDAR routing protocols composed of
location information of the reachable sensor nodes and sonobuoys. In order to efficiently manage the static and dynamic
nodes, the beaconing algorithm used should efficiently be designed. The beacon message should be as short as possible
in transmission systems. Consider a node with its known sonobuoys location, the beacon message is defined without
including lower layer headers which is given as follows:
(1)
Where,

Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 Page 56

 IPASJ International Journal of Computer Science (IIJCS)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJCS/IIJCS.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijcs@ipasj.org
Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 ISSN 2321-5992

m denotes size of the sequence number

n denotes size of the ID fields with its geographic coordinates
Enhanced beacon algorithm resolves the issues large packet transmission in underwater acoustic channel. Each
beacon message is embedded with sequence number, uniqueID, geographic position coordinates x,y and z nodes and
sonobuoys information. Since the deployment of GPS is restricted in underwater wireless sensor networks, the
intermediate nodes are aware about their nearest sonobuoys information Si(t) where t is the time period. Using the
localization services, each sensor node has known their location to eliminate the issue like network flooding.If the
sonobuoy receives the beacon message, the rest sensor nodes in the network are updated. Random filters, 0 and 1 are
added to the beacon messages and then broadcasted. By doing do, we can eliminate the network collision and
synchronization.
c) Neighbor candidate set selection

This step permits to find the appropriate neighbor node for efficient packet transmission systems. In the greedy
search process is applied to determine the set of neighbors for forwarding the packets. The sonobuoy node presented in
surface is used for packet transmission process. The neighbor candidate process is given as:
(2)
Where,
ni Intended node used for packet delivery.
Ni (t) Set of nearest neighbors
Si(t) Set of known sonobuoys at time period t.
D (a, b) Euclidean distance between nodes a and b.
d) Next hop forwarder set selection:

Prior work makes use of one neighbor node as next hop forwarder.When the neighbor node overhears, then the link
to the packet is dropped off. Each packet is broadcast to forwarding set comprised of several neighbors. Though
opportunistic routing has pitfalls, it significantly reduces the cost of the energy. OR model is used to reduce the rate of
packet retransmission process.Goodness is an evaluation metric that measures the performance of next-hop candidate
node. Priority state of the neighboring nodes updated when the packet size is increased. It is given as:
(3)
Where,
NADV (Normalized advance) with set of candidate node nc.
p( dic,m) is the packet delivery probability of m bits over distance dic.
Opportunistic routing selects highest priority node as next-hop forwarder and rest nodes executes when highest
priority node fails. The ith waiting time of the delayed packet transmission is given as:
(4)
Where Tpis the propagation time
T procis the packet processing time.

Fig.1. Workflow of the Proposed System

Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 Page 57

 IPASJ International Journal of Computer Science (IIJCS)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJCS/IIJCS.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijcs@ipasj.org
Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 ISSN 2321-5992

IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

This section depicts the simulation analysis of our proposed model. The performance of the proposed algorithm
deployed over MAC protocols without using its Request to Send (RTS), Clear To Send (CTS) and Acknowledgement
(ACK) mechanism.If the channel is free, the forwarder node broadcast the packets.For lowering theredundant
transmissions and nodes can simply listen to the channel and later drop the packet if it is relayed byother candidates.
The simulation parameters considered are:
Table 1. Simulation parameters
Transmission power 95dB
Transmission range 100m
Data generation rate One packet per second
Channel bit rate 10kbps
Propagation speed at 1500m/s
underwater environment
Area of relay nodes 500m * 500m *1000m

a) Packet Delivery ratio (PDR):

Packet Delivery Ratio is defined as the rate of packets delivered successfully to its intended node from the source
node. The fig.2 presents the packet delivery rate to its node densities. It is evident from the results PDR rate is high
when the no.of nodes also increases. Our proposed model reduces the no. of void areas in dense network.

Fig.2 Packet delivery ratio

b) Energy Consumption:

Energy consumption is defined as the energy consumed by each nodes in the underwater environment. It is measured
in millijoules (mj). Selecting a large radius may involve many nodes in packet forwarding moreover, it cause increases
duplicated packets, which at the end leads to more energy waste. On the other hand, lower radius causes more packet
failures. To desired this, in dense networks, the number of forwarding nodes has been slightly risesd or held constant by
GEDAR, to control the energy dissipation. Fig.3 presents the energy consumption per node with different node
densities.

80
Energy consumption

60
40
rate (mj)

20 GEDAR
0 GOR
150
200
250
300
350

Node densities

Fig.3. Energy consumption with different nodes densities

Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 Page 58

 IPASJ International Journal of Computer Science (IIJCS)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJCS/IIJCS.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijcs@ipasj.org
Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 ISSN 2321-5992

c) Average End to- End delay:

Average End-to-End delay is defined as the average delay time taken for packet creation and successful delivery of
packets to the destination node. The average end-to-end delay for all protocols decreases by increasing the number of
nodes, because the forwarding node can find more qualified nodes in its neighbourhood. This feature of GEDAR
increases its delay despite the use of reachability information. Furthermore, in GEDAR, each node can hold a packet
with less average holding time (by setting a lesser amount of TDelay) due to the fact that candidate nodes are closer to
each other on average.

Fig.4 Average End-to End delay with different node densities

d) Propagation deviation factor:

Propagation deviation factor is the value obtained for estimating the distance travelled by each packet from source to
the sink. It is given as:

Where TD is the aggregate of distance travelled and SD is the straight line distance between sink node and source
node. The pdf value is incremented, when longer distance is taken for packet delivery. Thus, efficient routing protocol
is used for selecting the optimal route with least pdf value. By increasing the number of nodes, the shorter routing paths
can be established by the routing protocols.

V. CONCLUSION
Dealing with the void issue in acoustic Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks (UWSNs) is a daunting task in routing
protocols. In this paper, we have enhanced the beaconing process by selecting efficient next hop forwarder node can
significantly increasing the routings performance.We have also investigated opportunistic routing to show how it can
overcome the drawback of unreliable acoustic transmission by taking advantage of intermediate nodes collaboration to
relay packets. To this end, we have proposed GEDAR, an opportunistic routing protocol, to minimize the number of
dropped packets by efficiently bypassing void areas and also to maximize the transmission reliability. GEDAR searches
best route path by improving the local information extracted from periodic beaconing and then selects the optimal path
within the cluster based on energy constraints.Our simulation results have shown that GEDAR significantly reduced
the packet loss, energy consumption, end-to-end delay and propagation deviation factor in sparse to dense scenarios.

REFERENCES
[1] Rodolfo W. L. Coutinho et al, Geographic and Opportunistic Routingfor Underwater Sensor Networks, IEEE
transactions on computers, 65(2), 2016.
[2]Heidemann, J.; Ye, W.; Wills, J.; Syed, A.; Li, Y. Research challenges and applications for underwater sensor
networking. In Proceedings of the IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC 2006),
Las Vegas, NV, USA, 36 April 2006; Volume 1, pp. 228235.
[3] Akyildiz, I.F.; Pompili, D.; Melodia, T. Underwater acoustic sensor networks: Research challenges. Ad Hoc
Netw. 2005, 3, 257279.

Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 Page 59

 IPASJ International Journal of Computer Science (IIJCS)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJCS/IIJCS.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijcs@ipasj.org
Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 ISSN 2321-5992

[4] Akyildiz, I.F.; Pompili, D.; Melodia, T. Challenges for efficient communication in underwater acoustic sensor
networks. ACM Sigbed Rev. 2004, 1, 38.
[5] Vasilescu, I.; Kotay, K.; Rus, D.; Dunbabin, M.; Corke, P. Data collection, storage, and retrieval with an
underwater sensor network. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor
Systems, San Diego, CA, USA, 24 November 2005; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2005; pp. 154165.
[6] Ayaz, M.; Baig, I.; Abdullah, A.; Faye, I. A survey on routing techniques in underwater wireless sensor networks.
J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2011, 34, 19081927.
[7] Pompili, D.; Akyildiz, I.F. Overview of networking protocols for underwater wireless communications. IEEE
Commun. Mag. 2009, 47, 97102.
[8] Kheirabadi, M.T.; Mohamad, M.M. Greedy routing in underwater acoustic sensor networks: A survey. Int. J.
Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2013, doi:10.1155/2013/701834.
[9] Noh, Y.; Lee, U.; Wang, P.; Choi, B.S.C.; Gerla, M. VAPR: Void-aware pressure routing for underwater sensor
networks. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2013, 12, 895908.
[10] Fang, Q.; Gao, J.; Guibas, L.J. Locating and bypassing holes in sensor networks. Mob. Netw. Appl. 2006.

Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2017 Page 60