Wajiha FAROOQ, Umar DRAZ, Tariq ALI, Ahmad SHAF, Sana YASIN

Atomic-shaped efficient delay and data gathering routing protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks

High end-to-end delay is a major challenge in autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV)-aided routing protocolsfor underwater monitoring applications. In this paper, a new routing protocol called atomic-shaped efficient delay anddata gathering (ASEDG) has been introduced for underwater wireless sensor networks. The ASEDG is divided into twophases; in the first phase, the atomic-shaped trajectory model with horizontal and vertical ellipticals was designed forthe movement of the AUV. In the second phase, two types of delay models were considered to make our protocol moredelay efficient: member nodes (MNs) to MNs and MNs to gateway nodes (GNs). The MNs-to-MNs delay in the networkspecifies how long is required for the selection of the next possible forwarders by eliminating the chances of backtrackingand a higher number of association links. The MNs-to-GNs delay is considered to choose the path from a multipathenvironment that takes a minimum amount of time for sending the packet from its generation to destination node. Forefficient data gathering, this new trajectory model creates the maximum possible GNs for the association of the MNs.Furthermore, our protocol, ASEDG, has been evaluated by using the aquasim network simulator (NS-2), and its resultswere compared with the already existing protocol, an efficient data gathering (AEDG) routing protocol. The simulationresults show that the ASEDG performed better than the AEDG in terms of end-to-end delay and throughput.

PDF

___

[1] Javaid N, Ilyas N, Ahmad A, Alrajeh N, Qasim U et al. An efficient data gathering routing protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks. Sensors 2015; 15 (11): 29149-29181. doi: 10.3390/s151129149
[2] Kim HW, Cho HS. SOUNET: Self organized underwater wireless sensor network. Sensors 2017; 17 (2): 283. doi: 10.3390/s17020283
[3] Poncela J, Aguayo M, Otero P. Wireless underwater communications. Wireless Personal Communications 2012; 64 (3): 547-560. doi: 10.1007/s11277-012-0600-z
[4] Khan JU, Cho HS. A distributed data gathering protocol using AUV in underwater sensor networks. Sensors 2015; 15 (8): 19331-19350. doi: 10.3390/s150819331
[5] Chang SH, Shih KP. Tour planning for AUV data gathering in underwater wireless. In: 18th International Conference on Network-Based Information Systems; Taipei, Taiwan; 2015. pp. 1-8. doi: 10.1109/NBiS.2015.120
[6] Khalid M, Ullah Z, Ahmad N, Arshad M, Jan B et al. A survey of routing issues and associated protocols in underwater wireless sensor networks. Journal of Sensors 2017; 2017: 7539751. doi: 10.1155/2017/7539751.
[7] Kao CC, Lin YS, Wu GD, Huang CJ. A comprehensive study on the Internet of Underwater Things: applications, challenges, and channel models. Sensors 2017; 17 (7): 1477. doi: 10.3390/s17071477
[8] Ali T, Jung LT, Faye I. Three hops reliability model for underwater wireless sensor network. In: International Conference on Computer and Information Sciences; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; 2014. pp. 1-6. doi: 10.1109/ICCOINS.2014.6868378
[9] Cheng C, Li L. Data gathering problem with the data importance consideration in underwater wireless sensor networks. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 2017; 78: 300-312. doi: 10.1016/j.jnca.2016.10.010
[10] Li N, Martínez JF, Meneses Chaus JM, Eckert M. A survey on underwater acoustic sensor network routing protocols. Sensors 2016; 16 (3): 414. doi: 10.3390/s16030414
[11] Cai W, Zhang M, Zheng YR. Task assignment and path planning for multiple autonomous underwater vehicles using 3D Dubins curves. Sensors 2017; 17 (7): 1607. doi: 10.3390/s17071607
[12] Shaf A, Ali T, Farooq W, Draz U, Yasin S. Comparison of DBR and L2-ABF routing protocols in underwater wireless sensor network. In: 15th International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences and Technology; Islamabad, Pakistan; 2018. pp. 746-750. doi: 10.1109/IBCAST.2018.8312305
[13] Jain SK, Mohammad S, Bora S, Singh M. A review paper on: autonomous underwater vehicle. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research 2015; 6 (2): 38.
[14] Goyal N, Dave M, Verma AK. Data aggregation in underwater wireless sensor network: recent approaches and issues. Journal of King Saud University – Computer and Information Sciences 2019; 31: 275-286. doi: 10.1016/j.jksuci.2017.04.007
[15] Ahmad A, Wahid A, Kim D. AEERP: AUV aided energy efficient routing protocol for underwater acoustic sensor network. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM Workshop on Performance Monitoring and Measurement of Heterogeneous Wireless and Wired Networks; Barcelona, Spain; 2013. pp. 53-60. doi: 10.1145/2512840.2512848
[16] Ilyas N, Alghamdi TA, Farooq MN, Mehboob B, Sadiq AH et al. AEDG: AUV-aided efficient data gathering routing protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks. Procedia Computer Science 2015; 52: 568-575. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2015.05.038
[17] Hollinger GA, Choudhary S, Qarabaqi P, Murphy C, Mitra U et al. Underwater data collection using robotic sensor networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 2012; 30 (5): 899-911. doi: 10.1109/JSAC.2012.120606
[18] Yoon S, Azad AK, Oh H, Kim S. AURP: an AUV-aided underwater routing protocol for underwater acoustic sensor networks. Sensors 2012; 12 (2): 1827-1845. doi: 10.3390/s120201827
[19] Li Z, Yao N, Gao Q. Relative distance based forwarding protocol for underwater wireless networks. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks 2014; 2014: 173089. doi: 10.1155/2014/173089
[20] Hosseini M, Chizari H, Poston T, Salleh MB, Abdullah AH. Efficient underwater RSS value to distance inversion using the Lambert function. Mathematical Problems in Engineering 2014; 2014: 175275. doi: 10.1155/2014/175275.
[21] Khan JU, Cho HS. Data gathering scheme using AUVs in large scale underwater sensor networks: a multihop approach. Sensors 2016; 16 (10): 1626. doi: 10.3390/s16101626
[22] Han G, Liu L, Bao N, Jiang J, Zhang W et al. AREP: An asymmetric link based reverse routing protocol for underwater acoustic sensor networks. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 2017; 92: 51-58. doi: 10.1016/j.jnca.2017.01.009
[23] Ilyas N, Akbar M, Ullah R, Khalid M, Arif A et al. SEDG: scalable and efficient data gathering routing protocol for underwater WSNs. Procedia Computer Science 2015; 52: 584-591. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2015.05.043
[24] Basagni S, Petrioli C, Petroccia R, Spaccini D. CARP: A channel aware routing protocol for underwater acoustic wireless networks. Ad Hoc Networks 2015; 34: 92-104. doi: 10.1016/j.adhoc.2014.07.014
[25] Ali T, Jung LT, Faye I. Diagonal and vertical routing protocol for underwater wireless sensor network. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2014; 129: 372-379. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.690
[26] Javaid MN, Ali B, Yahya A, Khan ZA, Qasim U. Improved hydrocast: a technique for reliable pressure based routing for underwater WSNs. In: 10th International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing; Fukuoka, Japan; 2016. pp. 284-290. doi: 10.1109/IMIS.2016.139
[27] Yildiz HU, Gungor VC, Tavli B. Packet size optimization for lifetime maximization in underwater acoustic sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 2019; 15 (2): 719-729. doi: 10.1109/TII.2018.2841830
[28] Wang Y, Zheng YR. 3 dimensional path planning for autonomous underwater vehicle. In: OCEANS 2018 MTS/IEEE; Charleston, SC, USA; 2018. pp. 1-6. doi: 10.1109/OCEANS.2018.8604783
[29] Nam H. Data gathering protocol based AUV path planning for long duration cooperation in underwater acoustic sensor networks. IEEE Sensors Journal 2018; 18 (21): 8902-8912. doi: 10.1109/JSEN.2018.2866837
[30] Li D, Wang P, Du L. Path planning technologies for autonomous underwater vehicles - a review. IEEE Access 2019; 7: 9745-9768. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2888617