International Journal of Networks (IJN)

Vol. 1, Issue. 1, April 2015

ISSN (Online): 2454-1060

Energy Efficient Data Acquisition system for increasing

the lifetime for WSN
1

N.Divya, 2 Kovendan.AKP, 3 Dr.D.Sridharan

1,2,3
Department of ECE, College of Engineering, Guindy, Anna University, Chennai, INDIA
AbstractWireless S ensor Networks (WS N) consists of
wireless nodes which are either stationary or mobile with limited
energy capabilities. These wireless nodes are located randomly on
a dynamically changing environment. The WS N is deployed over
a region to monitor any phenomenon. The WS N network is used
to collect and send the various kinds of data to the base station.
All the sensor nodes are battery-powered devices. The important
aspect is how to reduce the energy consumption of nodes to keep
the network lifetime extended to some reasonable ti me. Data
acquisition being a deep seated strategy in WS N holds major part
of the consumed energy. Hence, this paper proposes a routing
scheme through which the energy in WS N will be optimally
utilized by reducing the energy loss in its transmission from
sensed node to sink nodes. The consumed energy will depend on
the distance between sensor nodes and sink node.
Keywords- WS N, Data acquisition, energy efficiency, mobile node,
sink node.

I. INTRODUCTION
Wireless networks have a significant impact on the world.
The need for the battery operated devices running with energy
efficient wireless protocols increases since the wireless
networks become mobile and move in to remote locations.
Energy conservation in the wireless protocols will continue to
be a critical issue in the future because the energy densities of
the batteries have only doubled every 5 to 20 years, depending
on the particular chemistry of the battery. Prolonged
refinement of any given chemistry yields a diminishing return.
The main objective of any sensor network is to maximize
the network life time. All the sensor nodes are disposed when
they are out of battery. Hence the energy must be efficiently
utilized under these circumstances. Unlike other wireless
sensor networks, it is generally hard to charge or replace the
exhausted battery. Therefore it is essential to maximize the
network lifetime which is the most important and primary
objective leaving other metrics as secondary objective [1-2].
The three main components of the wireless sensor network
are sink node, sensor node and monitored events. The sensor
nodes are assumed to be stationary in most of the network
architecture. At the same time the mobility of sink node or
Cluster Head [CH] becomes necessary.

These sensor nodes are deployed randomly on a created

infrastructure in an ad-hoc manner. Energy efficiency and
performance are crucial based on the movement and position
of the sink node or cluster head. The sensor nodes are
deployed randomly over an area of interest and hence mult ihop routing becomes mandatory [3-5].
Many wireless networks have been deployed in the recent
years. The main aim of WSN that is deployed in large scale is
to have inexpensive sensor network with low power
utilization. Lot of efforts have been made to achieve this type
of inexpensive and low power utilization network. Some of
the application areas of this wireless sensor network are,
military applications such as battle field surveillance and
enemy tracking and civil applications such as habitat
monitoring, environment observation, forecast system, health
and other commercial applications [6].
The source of energy is very finite for the sensor nodes and
hence the energy efficiency is the most important
consideration. For the optimized usage of energy the sensor
must be in idle state. For energy efficient operation, clustering
approach is employed, where the cluster heads are randomly
selected based on the residual energy. The sensor nodes are
joined in to the clusters in a cost effective way. Power
optimization is well achieved by the reactive routing protocols
and sleep mode operations [7-8].
The primary task of the wireless sensor network is to
collect the data from the interested area and transmit that
information to the Base Station [BS]. A simple approach is
that each sensor node can directly transmit the information to
the BS. But, when the BS is located far away from the target
area, the sensor nodes will die quickly due to much of the
energy consumption. Therefore mobile sinks have been
proposed as a solution for the data acquisition in the WSN to
balance the energy consumption [9-10].
The overview of the related work of data acquisition is
provided in section II. System model is introduced in section
III and the proposed scheme is explained in detail. The
simulation results are analyzed in section IV. Finally, the work
is concluded in section.

10

International Journal of Networks (IJN)

Vol. 1, Issue. 1, April 2015

ISSN (Online): 2454-1060

II. RELATED WORK

III. SYSTEM MODEL

The challenging task is to design a wireless sensor network

where the sensor nodes are organised in to a multi-hop
wireless network that must be able to function properly for a
long time with a limited power supply. In order to solve this
problem, many researchers have suggested deploying different
types of nodes in to the network. The basic sensor nodes and
the sink node are the two types of nodes that are deployed in
the wireless sensor network. Sensing task is performed by the
basic sensor node. These sensing nodes are simple nodes
which have limited power supplies. The sink nodes organize
the basic sensors around them in to a cluster that only
communicates with the cluster node. The sink nodes are much
more powerful and focus on the communications and
computations. Such network helps to increase the energy
efficiency by using the cluster nodes as central media
controllers. This type of network helps to reduce the idle
listening and resending due to collisions. It also reduces the
protocol overhead used in collision avoidance. But this kind of
central controller cannot be used in the environment where the
network layout changes rapidly. Therefore the sink nodes
should be used only in the applications where the environment
and sensors are static [11-12].

The network model is constructed with 30 sensor nodes, a

Base Station and sink node. Two different types of sinks are
considered, one is static and the other is dynamic. With each
different types of sink the performance metrics are studied.
The performance metrics are, Energy consumed by the node,
Energy remain, Packet Count, Packet Delivery Ratio and the
Delay. First case is the network architecture with static sink
and the second case is the network architecture with mobile
sink. The performance metrics for both static and dynamic
sink is studied. The sensor nodes collect the data from the
interested region and send these data to the sink nodes which
are either static or dynamic. Finally this information is sent to
the BS. An assumption is made that each sensor nodes
transmit and receive the data with the fixed transmission and
reception power respectively and also it is assumed that the
mobile sink has memory and computing resources. In case of
the dynamic sink usage in the network, each sensor node will
choose its own Cluster Head (CH) or subsink in terms of hop
distance as its destination and it transmits its own data to the
CH. The number of nodes that are connected to each cluster is
independent of its communication time. Sometimes subsinks
with very short communication time may own large number of
sensor nodes.

Energy efficiency is one of the most important

performance measures in WSN. Over the past few decades,
considerable number of articles has been published on the
optimization of the power consumption. Optimization
framework for a WSN is proposed to determine whether a
direct transmission is preferred for a configuration of nodes on
a cooperative transmission.
In the recent years sink mobility has become an important
research topic in wireless sensor networks. Existing
methodology shows that sink mobility has a good performance
in WSN. In [13-15], mobile sinks are mounted on people or
animals which move randomly in order to collect the data
from the area of interest. The information is sensed by the
sensors where the sink trajectories are random. If the
trajectories of mobile sinks are constrained or predetermined
as in [16], then the efficient data collection problems are
concerned in order to improve the network performance. The
energy efficiency is improved by the path constrained sink
mobility of single-hop sensor network. But this may be
infeasible due to the limits of the path location and
communication power. Hence the authors propose multi-hop
sensor networks[17], [18] with the path constrained mobile
sink where the shortest path tree [SPT] method is used to
choose the cluster heads and route the data that may result in
the low energy efficiency for data collection.

Fig.1. Zone Partitioning

In case of the network architecture where the static sink

node is deployed, all the sensor nodes collect the data from the
interested area and send these data to the static sink which in
turn is sent to the Base Station. The sensor nodes are
partitioned in to two zones as shown in the fig 1. Each zone is
divided in to three clusters with each cluster having a Cluster

11

International Journal of Networks (IJN)

Vol. 1, Issue. 1, April 2015
Head. Here the Maximum Amount Shortest Path (MASP)
scheme is proposed to enhance the data collection. The sensor
nodes sense the data and send that information to the CH. The
CH in turn sends that data to the static sink. Through zone
partitioning the whole area to be monitored is divided in to
several zones and then the MASP scheme is executed to get
the optimal assignment of the members to the subsinks in each
zone.
The second case is the data collection using dynamic sink
as shown in fig2. These mobile sinks move towards the CH in
a shortest path and collect the data from them. The mobile
sink may be mounted on a public transport or animal or people
according to the application in which it is used. For both the
static and dynamic sink the performance metrics are studied
and the respective graphs are plotted. The energy profile and
the packet delivery ratio alone shown in the results and
discussion and other parameters are studied and the
comparison between static and dynamic sink is made through
the comparison table.

ISSN (Online): 2454-1060

Each of the sensor nodes is initially given the energy of
about 100J. The data is sensed and given to the static sink.
Now the energy consumed by the 30 sensor nodes and the
energy that remains after data collection is plotted in a graph
with the energy in Y axis and the number of nodes in the X
axis. During this data acquisition the total packet count that
has been transmitted and received are calculated. This data is
plotted in a graph with the nodes in X axis and number of
packets in Y axis. Another performance metric called the
packet delay is plotted between average packet received time
along Y axis and the number of packets along X axis. Finally
the packet delivery ratio is calculated and plotted in a graph.

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. STATIC SINK PERFORMANCE METRICS
The performance metrics are plotted in a graph for both the
static and dynamic sink. Fig 3 shows the energy consumed
graph for the static sink node. This graph depicts the amount
of that is consumed by all the sensor nodes when a static sink
is employed. Fig 5 shows the Packet Delivery Ratio. This
graph shows the percentage of packets received.

Fig 3. Energy consumed by all sensor nodes for static sink

The total amount of energy consumed by all the sensor

nodes is shown in the form of graph. In case of the static sink,
the energy consumed by 10 sensor nodes is 7J. The energy
consumption increases as the number of sensor nodes
increases. For 30 sensor nodes the amount of energy
consumed is 20J.
Fig.2. Network architecture with zone partitioning and clusters

12

International Journal of Networks (IJN)

Vol. 1, Issue. 1, April 2015

ISSN (Online): 2454-1060

Fig.4. Packet delivery ratio for static sink

The above graph shows the packet delivery ratio for

the static sink node architecture. For the transmission of 20
packets the percentage of packet delivered is about 97%. As
the number of packets increases the percentage decreases. For
30 nodes the static sink is able to collect only 75 packets. So
for 75 packets the percentage of packet delivered is about
80%. Other parameter like delay is also calculated for the
static sink node. The delay is about 925 S for the static sink
node.

B. DYNAMIC SINK RESULTS

Fig.6. Packet delivery ratio for mobile sink.

The above graph shows the packet delivery ratio for the
mobile sink node architecture. For the transmission of 30
packets the percentage of packet delivered is about 98.5%. As
the number of packets increases the percentage decreases. For
30 nodes the mobile sink is able to collect nearly 90 packets.
So for 75 packets the percentage of packet delivered is about
91%. For 90 packets the percentage of packet received is
87.5% which is high compared to static sink performance.
Other parameter like delay is also calculated for the static sink
node. The delay is about 755 S for the mobile sink node.
Compared to static sink this delay is less.
The comparison between the static and dynamic sink is
studied from the table below. This table is depicted from the
graphs above.

Table 1. comparison between static and dynamic sink

PERFORMANCE
STATIC SINK

DYNAMIC
SINK

ENERGY
CONSUMED

20 J

12.5 J

ENERGY
REMAIN

80 J

87.5 J

TOTAL
PACKET
COUNT

75

91

PACKET
DELIVERY
RATIO

82 %

92.3 %

PACKET

925 S

755 S

METRICS

Fig 5. Energy consumed for mobile sink

The total amount of energy consumed by all the sensor

nodes is shown in the form of graph. In case of the dynamic
sink, the energy consumed by 10 sensor nodes is 1.8J. The
energy consumption increases as the number of sensor nodes
increases. For 30 sensor nodes the amount of energy
consumed is 12.5J. when compared to static sink the mobile
sink consumes less energy.

13

International Journal of Networks (IJN)

Vol. 1, Issue. 1, April 2015
DELAY

The comparison table clearly shows that mobile sink

increases the performance compared to the static sink.

V. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE

In this paper a wireless Sensor Network has been designed
and tested for ensuring energy efficient data acquisition
system. The energy consumption has been reduced to about
30%. This will enhance the lifetime and it doesnt compromise
the network performance. The performance metrics has been
clearly measured and it symbolizes that the proposed system is
delivering data packets with more throughput compared to
static sink network. In future, the energy efficiency parameter
has to be considered with enhanced security of this network
for increasing the reliability along with lifetime of the
network.

ISSN (Online): 2454-1060

[11] Kartik N. Shah, Shantanu Santoki, Himanshu Ghetia and Abdul Gaffar
H., Energy Optimization in Wireless Sensor Networks, International
Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562, Vol. 8, No.
19 (2013) Research India Publications.
[12] Zhao Han, Jie Wu, Member, IEEE, Jie Zhang, Liefeng Liu, and Kaiyun
T ian, A General Self-Organized T ree-Based Energy-Balance Routing
Protocol for Wireless Sensor Network, IEEE Transactions On Nuclear
Science, Vol. 61, No. 2, April 2014.
[13] Fei Yin, Zhenhong Li, Haifeng Wang Renesas Mobile Corporation,
Shanghai Branch, China , Energy-Efficient Data Collection in Multiple
Mobile Gateways WSN-MCN Convergence System, The 10th Annual
IEEE- CCNC Smart Spaces and Sensor Networks
[14] A.Rajeswari, P.T.Kalaivaani, Energy Efficient Routing Protocol for
Wireless Sensor Networks Using Spatial Correlation Based Medium
Access Control Protocol Compared with IEEE 802.11.
[15] L. Song and D. Hatzinakos, Architecture of Wireless Sensor Networks
with Mobile Sinks: Sparsely Deployed Sensors, IEEE T rans. Vehicular
T echnology, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 1826-1836, July 2007.
[16] J. Luo, J. Panchard, M. Piorkowski, M. Grossglauser, and J. Hubaux,
MobiRoute: Routing towards a Mobile Sink for Improving Lifetime in
Sensor Networks, Proc. Second IEEE/ ACM Intl Conf. Distributed
Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS), pp. 480-497, 2006.
[17]A. Kansal, A. Somasundara, D. Jea, M. Srivastava, and D. Estrin,
Intelligent Fluid Infrastructure for Embedded Networks, Proc.ACM
MobiSys, pp. 111-124, 2004.

REFERENCES
[1] Ilker Demirkol, Cem Ersoy, and Fatih Alagz, MAC Protocols for
wireless Sensor Networks: a Survey

[18] A. Somasundara, A. Kansal, D. Jea, D. Estrin, and M. Srivastava,

Controllably Mobile Infrastructure for Low Energy Embedded
Networks, IEEE Trans. Mobile Computing, vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 958 -973,
Aug. 2006.

[2] Wei Ye, John Heidemann, Deborah Estrin, An Energy -Efficient MAC
Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks, 0-7803-7476-2/02/$17.00 (c)
2002 IEEE.
[3] R.C. Shah, S. Roy, S. Jain, and W. Brunette, Data MULEs: Modeling a
T hree-Tier Architecture for Sparse Sensor Networks, Proc. First IEEE
Intl Workshop Sensor Network Protocols and Applications, pp. 30-41,
2003.
[4] S. Jain, R.C. Shah, W. Brunette, G. Borriello, and S. Roy, Exploiting
Mobility for Energy Efficient Data Collection in Sensor Networks,
Mobile Networks and Applications, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 327 -339, 2006.
[5] Kazi Chandrima Rahman, A Survey on Sensor Network, Copyright
2010 JCIT, ISSN 2078-5828 (PRINT ), ISSN 2218-5224 (ONLINE),
Volume 01, Issue 01, Manuscript Code: 100715
[6] Ning Xu, Computer Science Department ,University of Southern
California, A Survey of Sensor Net work Applications.
[7] Hung-T a Pai, Yung Hsiang S. Han, "Energy-Efficient Multihop Polling in
Clusters of T wo-Layered Heterogeneous Sensor Networks" Source:
IEEE T ransactions on Computers v.57 no.2 (February 2008) p. 231-245
[8] Jalal Habibi, Ali Ghrayeb, and Amir G. Aghdam, Energy-Efficient
Cooperative Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks: A Mixed-Integer
Optimization Framework and Explicit Solution, IEEE transactions on
communications, vol. 61, no. 8, august 2013.
[9] Shuai Gao, Hongke Zhang, Sajal K. Das, Efficient Data Collection in
Wireless Sensor Networks with Path-Constrained Mobile Sinks, IEEE
T ransactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 592-608, 2011.
[10] Xinxin Liu, Han Zhao, et al, Trailing Mobile Sinks: A Proactive Data
Reporting Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks, IEEE T ransactions
on Computers, pp. 214-223, 2011.

14