Unit 4 - TX Power Control in WSN

.
UFMG - ICEX
DEPARTAMENTO DE CIÊNCIA DA UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE MINAS GERAIS
COMPUTAÇÃO
TRANSMISSION POWER CONTROL IN

MAC PROTOCOLS FOR WIRELESS
SENSOR NETWORKS
RT.DCC.011/2005
LUIZ H.A. CORREIA

DANIEL F. MACEDO
DANIEL A.C. SILVA
ALDRI L. DOS SANTOS
ANTÔNIO A.F. LOUREIRO
JOSÉ MARCOS S. NOGUEIRA
JUNHO
2005
Transmission Power Control in MAC Protocols for Wireless Sensor
Networks
Luiz H. A. Correia, Daniel F. Macedo, Daniel A. C. Silva

∗
Aldri L. dos Santos, Antonio A. F. Loureiro, José Marcos S. Nogueira
Abstract
Medium access control (MAC) protocols manage energy consumption on the network element dur-
ing communication, which is the most energy-consuming event on Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs).
One method to mitigate energy consumption is to adjust transmission power. This paper presents two
approaches to adjust transmission power in WSNs. The first approach employs dynamic adjustments
by exchange of information among nodes, and the second one calculates the ideal transmission power
according to signal attenuation in the link. The algorithms proposed were implemented and evaluated
with experiments, comparing their results with B-MAC, the standard MAC protocol in the Mica Motes
2 platform. Results show that transmission power control is an effective method to decrease energy con-
sumption, and incurs in a negligible loss in packet delivery rates. For node distances of 5m, the proposed
transmission power control techniques decrease energy consumption by 27% over B-MAC.
1. Introduction
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) are a subclass of traditional mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs),
and consist of a large number of sensor nodes, composed of processor, memory, battery, sensor devices
and transceiver. These nodes send monitoring data to an access point (AP), which is responsible for
forwarding data to the users [1]. Unlike traditional ad hoc networks, in general, it is not possible to
replace or recharge node batteries due to the number of nodes deployed or inhospitable environmental
conditions. Hence, energy conservation is a critical factor in WSNs.
Severe hardware and energy constraints preclude the use of protocols developed for MANETs, which
comparatively possess more resources. The strict requirements force networking protocols to be as much
energy-efficient as possible. Medium access control (MAC) protocols, for example, modify transceiver
parameters or even the topology of the network in order to reduce the energy consumption. One of
those parameters is the transmission power that, besides reducing energy consumption, also provides
higher throughput, due to the reduced number of collisions and the establishment of links with lower
bit error rates [2, 3, 4]. Although an effective mechanism to reduce energy consumption, transmission
power control is not implemented in any existing MAC protocol for WSNs. This occurs due to the highly
imprecise nature of readings provided by the transceiver, and also due to the restricted resources found
in current nodes. Those factors difficult an accurate calculation of the ideal transmission power.
∗
Computer Science Department, Federal University of Minas Gerais Belo Horizonte-MG, Brazil, E-mails:
{lcorreia,damacedo,daniacs,aldri,loureiro,jmarcos}@dcc.ufmg.br.
1
In this paper we propose a transmission power control module for WSNs, which can be employed in
any existing MAC protocol. Experiments in the Mica Motes 2 platform [5] show the efficiency of the
approaches proposed for power control, considering parameters such as energy and throughput.
This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents the main sources of energy consumption in
communication. Section 3 presents the related work. The methods proposed for transmission power
control are described in Section 4. Section 5 describes the evaluated scenarios and presents the results.
Finally, Section 6 draws the conclusions and future work.
2. Energy Consumption in Communication
Among the hardware components in a sensor node, the highest energy consumer is the transceiver [1].
In particular, the energy consumed by the transceiver is related to events in the communication and
network organization.
Communication events. Encompasses events such as overhearing (nodes listen to transmissions
even if they are not the destination of the packet), idle listening (nodes listen to the medium awaiting
transmissions) collision and transmission synchronization. Overhearing and idle listening are mitigated
by turning the radio periodically off (called duty cycles), or when incoming transmissions are not driven
to the node. Collisions and transmission synchronization are avoided with the use of backoff techniques,
medium reservation and the exchange of messages [6].
Network organization. Is related to the network topology and the communication pattern (single-
hop or multi-hop). The topology can be modified by altering the transmission power. With shorter
communication ranges, the probability of hidden terminals [2, 7] and the number of collisions [8] is
smaller, reducing energy consumption. Network organization can also be changed by topology control
protocols, which turn off nodes producing redundant or unnecessary data to the application [9].
Collision
A B C D
Transmission using power control

Transmission without power control
Figure 1. Adjusting transmission power to avoid collisions.
Existing MAC protocols employ energy-saving techniques which operate only over communication
events, ignoring network topology. Transmission power control techniques, however, can be very effective,
as shown in figure 1. In this example, if nodes B and D, at the same time, transmit data at the typical
transmission power (dashed lines) to nodes A and C, respectively, a collision will occur at node C. If the
transmission power is reduced to the minimum necessary to reach the destination of the packet (solid
lines), no collisions occur. Besides decreasing the number of collisions, transmission power control has
other benefits, detailed below.
Transmission Power Control in MAC Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks - DCC/UFMG - Technical Report: RT.DCC.011/2005
2
Benefits of Transmission Power Control
Transmission power control allows several improvements in the operation of WSNs, such as the estab-
lishment of links with higher reliability, communication with the minimum energy cost, and better reuse
of the medium.
Links with higher reliability. When used in conjunction with link reliability assessment algorithms,
power control techniques can be used to improve the reliability of a link. Upon detecting that link
reliability is below a certain threshold, the MAC protocol increases the transmission power, lowering the
probability of receiving corrupted data.
Communication at minimum energy cost. When communicating at a fixed transmission power,
nodes waste energy since some links already have a high probability of a successful delivery. Hence, the
transmission control algorithm could decrease the transmission power to a level where link reliability is
still high, but energy consumption is lower.
Better reuse of the medium. When nodes communicate at the exact power needed to ensure a
successful communication, signal range is nothing broader than it was supposed to. Thus, only nodes
which really must share the same space will contend to access the medium, decreasing the amount of
collisions in the network. This reduced number of collisions will also enhance network utilization and
lower latency times.
3. Related Work
Several studies characterized channel propagation in wireless networks. Lal et al. [10] showed that it is
possible to identify link reliability using an energy-efficient algorithm. Reijers et al. [11] studied the effect
of obstacles and environmental changes on link quality. Also, results showed that propagation is asym-
metric and directional. RSSI (Received Signal Strength Indicator) readings were found to be extremely
dependent on environmental conditions, thus should be used with caution. Given the irregularity of
signal propagation in wireless transmissions, Zhou et al. [12] developed a new propagation model, which
closely resembles the results obtained from experimental data.
Transmission power control is an active line of study in MANETs. Several MAC protocols employing
this technique have been proposed. PCMA (Power Controlled Multiple Access) is a MAC protocol which
provides communication at minimum propagation ranges, allowing spatial reuse [2]. Agarwal et al.
proposed a distributed power control algorithm for MANETs [7]. Pires et al. improved this algorithm
by adding a table in each node, which stores the transmission power used on previous transmissions [13].
In order to mitigate asymmetric links caused by transmission power variation, Jung & Vaidya proposed
that transmission power should be adjusted for every transmitted byte [3].
The transmission power control techniques developed for MANETs do not apply to WSNs. Since the
calculation performed is complex and imprecise in the transceivers employed in WSNs, current MAC
protocols for WSNs do not implement transmission power control [14, 15, 16]. Our implementation of
transmission power control improves network operation by minimizing contention and decreasing the
amount of energy required for communication. Our solution employs a transmission power calculation
adapted to the restrictions found in WSNs. Also, we use tables to store the minimum transmission power,
as in current solutions.
4. Identifying the Ideal Transmission Power
In order to identify the ideal transmission power, nodes must perform calculations based on several
readings from the transceiver and the battery. Those are:
3
• RSSI (Received Signal Strength Indicator): is the signal strength measured by the transceiver at its
input interface. RSSI measurements are used to calculate the noise at the medium and the signal
strength when receiving incoming data.
• Sensitivity: is the least energetic power level at which the transceiver is able to detect and decode
data correctly. If any transmission is received at a power level below this limit, data will be garbled.
• Battery voltage: RSSI values read from the radio are calculated with battery voltage as a reference.
Thus, in order to convert any RSSI reading to the actual reception power, the voltage at the moment
of the reception must be known.
−60
Experimental data
−65 Nominal strength
Average noise
Signal strength (dBm)
−70
−75
−80
−85
−90
−95
−100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Distance (m)
Figure 2. Received signal strength when varying the distance among nodes.
In a successful transmission, the received signal strength is superior to the average noise at the receiver
(the signal strength sampled when there are no ongoing transmissions on the medium). Communication
quality also depend on factors such as distance among the receiver and the transmitter and the existence
of sources of reflexion, refraction and dispersion. Figure 2 presents the received signal strength for
transmissions at 5 dBm, when varying the distance among the transmitter and the receiver, in the Mica
Motes 2 platform. The “Nominal strength” curve shows the expected behavior of the signal, while the
“Experimental data” curve shows empirical data. We infer from those curves that reception strength is
proportional to the distance between the transmitter and receiver. The average noise, however, suffered
no significant alterations.
Signal propagation occurs differently for indoor and outdoor environments, thus propagation models
are specific to each type of environment [17, 18]. Although such models can be used to provide a fair
approximation of the ideal transmission power needed to reach a node, those models are too costly to be
executed in a sensor node. Thus, new algorithms suitable to the scarce resources found in WSNs must
be developed. Two such methods are described below.
4.1. Assessing the Ideal Transmission Power Through Node Interaction
The ideal transmission power can be dynamically determined by the interaction of nodes. Transceivers
transmit data at only a few power levels. The transceiver used in the Mica Motes 2 platform, for example,
provides 22 different levels, separated at roughly 1 dBm [19]. The switching between different power levels
4
takes 20 µs. Since the number of possibilities is quite small, it is possible to iterate over the available
power levels, increasing or decreasing the transmission power when necessary.
Figure 3. Operation of the interactive algorithm.
The algorithm proposed calculates the ideal transmission power by repeated refinements, and operates
in two phases. Figure 3 shows the operation of the algorithm. In the first phase, the ideal transmission
power is determined, while in the second phase the transmission power is dynamically adapted to any
environmental change. Initially, the ideal transmission power is set to the maximum value allowed by the
transceiver. Nodes wishing to determine the ideal transmission power send a power query message (MP Q )
piggy-backed in data packets at the “current” ideal transmission power, and await for a confirmation
of reception, such as an acknowledgement (ACK) packet. If the reception is confirmed, the transmitter
decreases the ideal transmission power by one level, and sends another MP Q message. When the reception
of a MP Q message is not confirmed, the transmitter assumes that the ideal transmission power was found,
and the second phase of operation starts.
In the second phase of the algorithm, nodes use ACKs to determine if the ideal transmission power
should be increased or decreased. If a number of consecutive transmissions are not confirmed with ACKs
(this number is called the increase threshold, or LI ), the ideal transmission power is increased one level.
Since the noise can also decrease due to environmental changes, communication can also improve, thus the
transmission power is lowered if a certain number of consecutive messages are successfully received (this
number is called the decrease threshold, or LD ). The values of LI and LD must be adjusted according
to the typical throughput of the application, avoiding that the algorithm reacts too late to variations in
link reliability when the throughput is low, or that such changes are too frequent when the throughput
is high. The algorithm treats node failures and transmission failures as being the same, since the use of
ACKs to assess link reliability does not allow a distinction of such events. Broadcast packets are always
transmitted at a fixed power, since those packets are not acknowledged.
5
4.2. Assessing the Ideal Transmission Power Through Signal Attenuation
The ideal transmission power can also be calculated as a function of signal attenuation. The ideal
power is such that, given the attenuation in the link, data is transmitted at a signal strength that allows
the reception at a signal slightly higher than both radio sensitivity and the noise on the receiver.
This method works as follows. Nodes periodically sample the signal strength when no transmissions
occur, in order to determine the base noise (NB ). If node A wishes to communicate with node B, it
transmits a packet to B at the standard transmission power (PT X ). When B receives the packet from A,
it determines the received signal strength (PRX , or reception power) and calculates the ideal transmission
power (PT Xideal )1 from A to B using equation 1. Next, B sends the calculated power to A, which will
transmit subsequent messages to B at this power level. In order to dynamically adjust the ideal power
transmission, node A always sends in its packets to B the current transmission power. B, in turn,
recalculates the ideal transmission power, and sends this value to A piggy-backed in the ACK messages.
½ ¾
RXthreshold SIN Rthreshold × NB
PT Xideal = max , (1)
GA→B GA→B
The ideal transmission power is directional, that is, it depends on the direction of the communication,
and must compensate the attenuation imposed by the link ( RXGthreshold
A→B
). Also, the reception power must
SIN Rthreshold × NB
be higher than the noise and radio sensitivity ( GA→B ) at the receiving node. The attenuation
from A to B (GA→B , or gain) is the relation of the reception and transmission power ( PPRX TX
), and is
considered to be symmetric in our calculations. The signal to noise ratio (SIN R) is the ratio of the
reception signal when compared to the noise, and NB is the noise in node B. The transmission power
must ensure that the signal is received in B without errors. In order to do so, some values must
be determined empirically, such as radio sensitivity (RXthreshold ) and the SINR threshold, since they
vary for each transceiver. Finally, the calculated power must lie within the maximum and minimum
transmission power allowed by the radio.
Sensor nodes provide integer values as output for RSSI readings, which must be converted to values
in dBm. Since current sensor nodes do not perform floating point arithmetics, the calculation must be
made with integers, compromising its precision. Besides, readings from the transceiver and battery vary
over time, thus the calculation must be adjusted to avoid subtle variations. The challenge of calculating
the transmission power through attenuation resides in defining a precise, stable and efficient algorithm,
which can be implemented with the operations provided by the micro-controller.
4.3. Storing the Ideal Transmission Power
To communicate at the ideal transmission power without requiring a calculation before every packet
transmission, the protocol stores the current ideal transmission for each neighbor node [13]. Thus, nodes
first query the table in order to detect if the ideal transmission power was already calculated. If it was,
then data will be sent at this power. If it was not, the power transmission calculation is executed, and
the result is stored on the table for future use. Table 1 shows the fields stored in the table. Each node
stores the ideal transmission power, coded as the bit configuration that must be fed into the radio in
order to transmit at the ideal power (P otT x). A control variable (N oReduce) indicates if the ideal power
has been calculated, while the Addr field stores the MAC address of the neighbor.
Since the noise is dynamic, and nodes may move or leave the network, entries on the table are inval-
idated if no transmissions occur after some time. This avoids that nodes transmit data at the wrong
1
The relation in the equation has its terms in mW.
6
Field Size Description
P otT x 1 byte Ideal Tx. power
N oReduce 1 byte Ideal Tx. power already calculated?
Addr 2 bytes MAC address of the neighbor
Table 1. Fields stored and their memory consumption in the Mica Motes 2 platform.
power after extended periods of silence.
5. Evaluation
To evaluate the efficiency of the proposed transmission power control techniques, we conducted exper-
iments in the Mica Motes 2 platform, modifying its standard MAC protocol, called B-MAC, to transmit
packets at the ideal transmission power. The version employing the iterative method is called B-MAC-
PCI, while the version employing the attenuation method is called B-MAC-PCA.
5.1. B-MAC Protocol
The B-MAC protocol was tailored to event-driven applications [14], and aims to be energy-efficient,
avoid collisions and be simple, reducing code size. In order to broaden its applicability, B-MAC provides
interfaces to reconfigure most of its parameters.
Since B-MAC does not employ channel reservation (RTS/CTS messages), the protocol mitigates colli-
sions with an heuristic called CCA (Clear Channel Assessment), which is used to identify transmissions
in the medium. This heuristic periodically samples the signal strength when there are no ongoing trans-
missions, in order to determine the maximum noise level (the base noise). If the sampled signal strength
is higher than the base noise, the protocol detects an ongoing transmission.
Idle-listening is minimized with the use of a duty cycle. Nodes periodically sample the channel,
using the CCA heuristic, to check for transmissions. If a transmission is not identified, nodes enter the
reception mode. To ensure that every packet sent is received by all nodes, preambles must be as long as
the inactive period of the duty cycle. This asynchronous channel listening method is called LPL (Low
Power Listening).
5.2. B-MAC-PC Protocols
The B-MAC-PC protocol was implemented in the TinyOS operating system [20], over the B-MAC
protocol. In order to further increase energy savings, power control information is piggy-backed in data
and acknowledgement (ACK) packets. The power control information increased the data packet size
by 3 bytes (one byte for the transmitted power, and 2 bytes for the sender address). ACK packets are
increased in 5 bytes (2 bytes for the sender address, another 2 bytes for the receiver address, and one
byte for the ideal transmission power).
Besides transmitting additional fields at each packet, B-MAC-PC employs a transmission power table,
described in section 4.3. This table stores information of up to 20 neighbors. As nodes might not send
unicast messages to every neighbor, the size of the table can be reduced according to the needs of the
application. The addition of the interactive transmission power control module increased the code size
of B-MAC from 7650 to 8440 bytes, and the RAM memory consumed increased from 242 to 340 bytes.
B-MAC-PC using the attenuation method consumed 9600 and 385 bytes in code memory and RAM,
respectively. We conducted empirical measurements to determine some parameters used in B-MAC-PC.
Those measurements are briefly described below.
7
Interactive method (B-MAC-PCI). The ideal values for LI and LD were adjusted to minimize
packet losses, as shown in figure 4. When increasing LD , less packets are lost, but the method responds
slowly to environmental changes. For LI , the behavior is the opposite. LI should be set to a small
value, since it responds rapidly to variations in the noise. Figures 5 and 6 show the behavior of the
transmission power when varying LD and LI , respectively. Figure 5 shows that higher values of LD keep
the transmission power more stable, while smaller values of LI increase energy consumption, since the
transmission power is more easily and frequently increased. Figure 6 shows that the value of LI also
defines the amplitude of the variation. For small values of LI , errors in bursts might significantly increase
the transmission power.
70%
LI = 1
60% LI = 2
LI = 3
50% LI = 4
Packets lost (%)
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1 2 3 4 8
LD
Figure 4. Average packet losses when varying LD and LI .
−6
LD = 1
−8 LD = 8
Transmission power (dBm)
−10
−12
−14
−16
−18
−20
20 40 60 80 100 120
Packets sent
Figure 5. Transmission power behavior when varying LD .
Attenuation method (B-MAC-PCA). The values of RXthreshold and SIN Rthreshold were defined
in experiments where we varied the distance between nodes until the receiver could not decode the
transmitted data. The experiments were made in an outdoor area free of obstacles, using two nodes
elevated 1.5m from the ground. The transmission power used was 5 dBm. From this experiment we
determined SIN Rthreshold as 10 dBm, and RXthreshold as -85 dBm.
8
−6
LI = 1
−8 LI = 4

−10
−12
−14
−16
−18
−20
20 40 60 80 100 120
Packets sent
Figure 6. Transmission power behavior when varying LI .
5.3. Experimental Results
We measured the behavior of B-MAC and B-MAC-PC when varying the distance between the receiver
and the transmitter. Our experiment consisted of two Mica Motes 2 nodes. The first node sent 400
messages destined to the second node, at a rate of four messages per second. The experiments were
made in an outdoor area, free of any obstacles. We chose to use only two nodes in order to avoid
interference with other nodes. Nodes were placed 71cm above the ground to avoid reflexion and absorption
phenomena. Node distance was varied from 5 to 20 meters. LI was set to one, and LD was set to eight.
In B-MAC, we employed the standard transmission power, which is 0 dBm. All the results are presented
as an average of five independent experiments, with confidence interval of 95%.
Figure 7 shows the delivery rates for the protocols. Both the attenuation method (B-MAC-PCA) and
the iterative method (B-MAC-PCI) sustained nearly constant delivery rates when varying the distance
among nodes. The iterative method was the most stable, yielding approximately 87.5% of packets
delivered. The attenuation method delivered from 79% up to 86% of the packets. B-MAC results, on
the other hand, are dependent on the distance among nodes. It ranges from an outstanding 98.5%,
when nodes are 5m apart from each other, to 14.2% for 20m of separation. This is mostly due to the
reception power, which increases the bit error rate of the channel. For distances of 25 meters (not shown),
the transmission power in B-MAC is insufficient, and no packets are received, while both B-MAC-PC
protocols kept their delivery rates intact.
Figure 8 presents the transmission power. For distances of 5 and 10 meters, B-MAC-PCI and B-MAC-
PCA decrease the standard transmission power from 0 dBm to -5.7 dBm and -4.7 dBm, respectively.
Meanwhile, B-MAC still transmits at the standard power, consuming more energy. The use of lower
transmission power allows energy savings of 27% and 21% over B-MAC when using B-MAC-PCI and B-
MAC-PCA, for a distance of 5m. For a distance of 10m, this economy drops to 6.9% and 8%, respectively.
For distances of 15m or more, the standard transmission power is barely enough to reach the nodes (as
shown in Figure 7), thus BMAC’s link quality decreases. In those distances, B-MAC-PC increases the
transmission power in order to maintain an acceptable link quality, also increasing the energy consumed.
However, this increase is compensated by a much higher packet delivery rate.
The causes of packet losses in B-MAC and in B-MAC-PC are shown in Figures 9 and 10, respectively.
In B-MAC, for distances up to 10m, half of the packets lost are due to CRC errors, and the other half is
lost because the preamble is not detected. When distance increases, the most important cause of packet
9
100
90
Average delivery rate (%)

80
70
60
50
40
30
B−MAC−PCI
20 B−MAC−PCA
B−MAC
10
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Distance among receiver and transmitter nodes (m)
Figure 7. Average delivery rate.
4
3
2
1
0
−1
−2
−3
−4 B−MAC−PCI
−5 B−MAC−PCA
B−MAC
−6
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Figure 8. Average transmission power.
losses is preamble decoding. When analysing the results for B-MAC-PC (Figure 10), we identified that
a lost preamble is the most significant cause of packet losses, accounting for roughly 76% of the total in
the iterative method (“I” bars), and 66% of all losses in the attenuation method (the “A” bars). Thus,
both B-MAC and B-MAC-PC would benefit from a preamble seek algorithm more resilient to bit errors.
The attenuation and iterative methods showed frequent variations in the transmission power, as shown
in Figure 11. This is caused by noise variations, and also due to imprecisions in transceiver readings.
Ideally, the transmission power would change only when a significant variation in noise occurs, that is,
the methods should be less susceptible to ephemerous variations. We plan to incorporate concepts from
signal filtering disciplines in the algorithm, in order to avoid frequent transmission power variations.
This is a challenging task, as signal filter algorithms must be small and efficient, in order to run in the
restricted processors found in current sensor nodes.
5.4. Simulation Results
The precision of the attenuation calculation was evaluated in a PC, using logs from previous experi-
ments. Table 2 shows that results calculated in the node are very close to the expected value, and the
10
90
No Preamble
80 CRC
70
60
Packets lost (%)

50
40
30
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 9. Cause of packet losses in B-MAC.
22
20
18
Packets lost (%)
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
0 5 10 15 20 25
No Preamble (I)
CRC (I)
No Preamble (A)
CRC (A)
Figure 10. Cause of packet losses in B-MAC-PC (interactive and attenuation).
average error is close to the error incurred in rounding. We also ran the calculation in a simulator for the
processor found in the Mica Motes 2 platform. Results for 20,480 executions of the code with no compiler
optimizations showed that the calculation takes 834.17 cycles (208.54µs) on average. We chose not to
use any compiler optimization, since initial testing showed that the compiler was artificially speeding up
the calculation by storing frequently used values. Compiler optimizations, however, may be valuable in
a real implementation.
6. Conclusion and Future Work
Among the tasks performed by sensor nodes, communication consumes most of the energy. Thus,
medium access control protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) must employ energy-saving algo-
rithms. Transmission power control is one such mechanism, however it was not used in WSNs due to the
limitations imposed by the sensor nodes. This article proposed and evaluated, through experiments and
simulations, two transmission control algorithms developed for WSNs. Those methods allow the defini-
tion of new protocols, which improve network lifetime and performance by adjusting the transmission
11
5
Transmission power (dBm) 4
3
2
1
0
−1
−2
−3 Iterative method
Attenuation method
−4
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Packet number
Figure 11. Transmission power variation in time.
Property Value
Number of executions 7929
Average error 0.2887 dBm
Maximum error 0.7526 dBm
Minimum error 0.0013 dBm
First quartile of the error 0.1178 dBm
Median of the error 0.2342 dBm
Table 2. Precision of the transmission power calculation.
power to spend the minimum amount of energy needed to reach the receiver with a good communica-
tion quality. Results showed that transmission power control is an effective method to decrease energy
consumption, and incurs in a negligible loss in packet delivery rates.
As future work, we intend to perfect the transmission power algorithms in order to avoid frequent
transmission power variations. Also, results showed that the use of different preamble sizes and various
preamble identification algorithms might decrease packet losses. Finally, the transmission power control
technique must be evaluated in MAC protocols which employ channel reservation, exploring RTS and
CTS messages to improve the performance of the transmission power calculation.
References
[1] I. F. Akyildiz, W. Su, Y. Sankarasubramaniam, and E. Cayirci. A Survey on Sensor Networks. IEEE
Communications, 40(8):102–114, 2002.
12
[2] Jeffrey Philip Monks. Transmission Power Control for Enhancing the performance of wireless packet
data networks. Doctor of philosophy, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2001.
[3] Eun-Sun Jung and Nitin H. Vaidya. A power control MAC protocol for ad hoc networks. In
Proceedings of the 8th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking, pages
36–47. ACM Press, 2002.
[4] Phill Karn. A New Channel Access Protocol for Packet Radio. In American Radio Relay League –
9th Computer Networking Conference, April 1990.
[5] Jason Hill, Robert Szewczyk, Alec Woo, Seth Hollar, David Culler, and Kristofer Pister. System
architecture directions for networked sensors. In ASPLOS-IX: Proceedings of the ninth international
conference on Architectural support for programming languages and operating systems, pages 93–104.
ACM Press, 2000.
[6] Luiz H. A. Correia, Daniel F. Macedo, Aldri L. dos Santos, José M. Nogueira, and Antonio A. F.
Loureiro. A taxonomy for medium access control protocols in wireless sensor network. Annales des
télécommunications, 2005. to appear.
[7] S. Agarwal, S. Krishnamurthy, R. Katz, and S.K. Dao. Distributed power control in ad hoc wireless
networks. In Personal and Indoor Mobile Radio Communication – (PIMRC), volume 2, pages 59–66.
IEEE, October 2001.
[8] Sameer Tilak, Nael B. Abu-Ghazaleh, and Wendi Heinzelman. Infrastructure Trade-offs Sensor
Networks. In First International Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Applications, Electrical
and Computer Engineering, 2002.
[9] Michaela Cardei and Jie Wu. Energy-Efficient Coverage Problems in Wireless Ad Hoc Sensor Net-
works. Journal of Computer Communications on Sensor Networks, 2004.
[10] D. Lal, A. Manjeshwar, F. Herrmann, E. Uysal-Biyikoglu, and A. Keshavarzian. Measurement and

characterization of link quality metrics in energy constrained wireless sensor networks. In IEEE
GLOBECOM, pages 172–187, December 2003.
[11] Niels Reijers, Gertjan Halkes, and Koen Langendoen. Link layer measurements in sensor networks.
In 1st IEEE Int. Conference on Mobile Ad hoc and Sensor Systems (MASS ’04), Oct 2004.
[12] Gang Zhou, Tian He, Sudha Krishnamurthy, and John A. Stankovic. Impact of radio irregularity
on wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Mobile systems,
applications, and services, pages 125–138. ACM Press, 2004.
[13] Alexandre Andrade Pires, Marcelo Fernandes Fontes, and José Ferreira de Rezende. Proposta e
avaliação de um esquema de controle de potência com memória em redes ad hoc 802.11. In Simpósio
Brasileiro de Redes de Computadores, Gramado, RS, Maio 2004.
[14] Joseph Polastre, Jason Hill, and David Culler. Versatile low power media access for wireless sensor
networks. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Embedded networked sensor systems,
pages 95–107. ACM Press, 2004.
[15] Wei Ye, John Heidemann, and Deborah Estrin. An energy-efficient mac protocol for wireless sensor
networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Infocom, pages 1567–1576, New York, NY, USA, June 2002.
13
[16] Koen Langendoen and Gertjan Halkes. Energy-efficient medium access control. In R. Zurawski,
editor, Embedded Systems Handbook. CRC Press, 2005.
[17] H. T. Friis. A note on a simple transmission formula. Proc. IRE, 34, 1946.
[18] William C. Lee. Mobile Communications Engineering. McGraw-Hill Professional, 1982.
[19] CC 1000. Chipcon corporation. CC1000 low power FSK transceiver. http://www.chipcon.com,
March 2005.
[20] Philip Levis, Sam Madden, Joseph Polastre, Robert Szewczyk, Kamin Whitehouse, Alec Woo, David
Gay, Jason Hill, Matt Welsh, Eric Brewer, and David Culler. TinyOS: An operating system for
wireless sensor networks. In W. Weber, J. Rabaey, and E. Aarts, editors, Ambient Intelligence.
Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, 2004.
14

Unit 4 - TX Power Control in WSN

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Unit 4 - TX Power Control in WSN

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

.

TRANSMISSION POWER CONTROL IN

LUIZ H.A. CORREIA

Luiz H. A. Correia, Daniel F. Macedo, Daniel A. C. Silva

2. Energy Consumption in Communication

Transmission using power control

Figure 1. Adjusting transmission power to avoid collisions.

4. Identifying the Ideal Transmission Power

4.1. Assessing the Ideal Transmission Power Through Node Interaction

Figure 3. Operation of the interactive algorithm.

4.3. Storing the Ideal Transmission Power

power after extended periods of silence.

5.1. B-MAC Protocol

5.2. B-MAC-PC Protocols

Figure 4. Average packet losses when varying LD and LI .

Figure 5. Transmission power behavior when varying LD .

Transmission power (dBm)

Figure 6. Transmission power behavior when varying LI .

5.3. Experimental Results

Average delivery rate (%)

Figure 7. Average delivery rate.

Figure 8. Average transmission power.

5.4. Simulation Results

Packets lost (%)

Figure 9. Cause of packet losses in B-MAC.

Figure 10. Cause of packet losses in B-MAC-PC (interactive and attenuation).

6. Conclusion and Future Work

Table 2. Precision of the transmission power calculation.

[10] D. Lal, A. Manjeshwar, F. Herrmann, E. Uysal-Biyikoglu, and A. Keshavarzian. Measurement and

[18] William C. Lee. Mobile Communications Engineering. McGraw-Hill Professional, 1982.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen