Você está na página 1de 4

Manpreet Singh et al.

, International Journal of Wireless Communications and Network Technologies, 3(5), August September 2014, 78-81
78



A Novel Approach to Minimize End-to-End Delay in Wireless Sensor Network

Manpreet Singh
1
, Priyanka Dayal
2

1
PG Student, ECE, Punjab Institute of Technology, Kapurthala, India, E-mail: reet_0987@hotmail.com.
2
Assistant Professor, ECE, Punjab Institute of Technology, Kapurthala, India, E-mail: priyanka23dayal@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT
In wireless sensor network, end-to-end delay is considered to
be an important QoS metric, also for any application that
involves small-sized files transmission. In this paper, we focus
on how to minimize the end-to-end delay in WSN. The term
end-to-end delay is defined as the total time taken by a single
packet to reach the destination. It is a resultant of many factors
including the interference level along the path, the length of the
routing path and number of hops in the routing path. In this
paper, we present SPR and a transmission scheduling scheme
that minimize the end-to-end delay along a provided route. Our
proposed scheme is based on integer linear programming and it
also involves interference modelling. Using this scheme, there
is no conflict in the transmission at any time. Simulation is
done in MATLAB and through simulation, our proposed SPR
and link scheduling scheme has shown significant reduction in
end-to-end delay regardless of other routing algorithm used.
Keywords: FCFS, SPR, SCH, SPR+SCH, WSN
1. INTRODUCTION
In a wireless sensor network, sensor nodes are powered by
small batteries that cannot be charged or replaced. Hence,
sensors can only send a finite number of bits from source to
sink until they run out of energy. End-to-end delay is
considered to be the major metrics for quality of service. Both
data rate and end-to-end latency is a combined effect for user-
perceived data transfer speed. For the transmission of small-
sized file, end-to-end delay is the dominating factor and for
transferring a large-sized file, the dominating factor is the data
rate. In wireless sensor network, where sensor nodes need to be
periodically reported to the sink, end-to-end delay plays an
important role.
In past years, we have seen many papers regarding how to
maximize throughput in WSN [1]-[8]. Moreover, the solution
that enhances network throughput often neglects the aspect of
delay and leads to poor results in end-to-end latency. The more
preference is provided to the path with less number of hops
without considering the factor that it has certain demerits also
that leads to end-to-end delay.
(a)

(b)
Figure 1: (a) With maximumthroughput routing, latency is 7 slot-
time; (b) With minimumdelay routing, latency is 5 slot-time.

For the given network in Figure 1, a maximum throughput
routing algorithm would prefer (a). Since the total throughput is
more than that of the single path. Whereas a minimum delay
routing algorithm would prefer (b) since it is the shortest route
and also there is no interference from any other data flows.
Basically the two routing algorithms with different objectives
result in different paths.
In the example shown in Figure 1, minimum delay happens to
have the shortest path. In this paper we will show that shortest
path always leads to the minimum delay is a misbelieve. In
fact, end-to-end delay is a combined result of both the
interference level along the path and the number of hops on the
path. The shortest path leads to the minimum delay only if it is
the least interfered path.


ISSN 2319 - 6629
Volume 3, No.5, August September 2014
International Journal of Wireless Communications and Networking Technologies
Available Online at http://warse.org/pdfs/2014/ijwcnt01352014.pdf

Manpreet Singh et al., International Journal of Wireless Communications and Network Technologies, 3(5), August September 2014, 78-81
79


(a)

(b)
Figure 2: (a) With a single data flow S1 _ D1; (b) With two data flows
S1 _ D1 and S2 _ D2. Numbers on links are slot numbers. There are 5
distinct slot numbers.
As interference works adversely for throughput in the same
way it does for delay. Suppose to transmit one packet each slot
is used and a packet is scheduled so that it can use the very next
available slot as soon as it arrives. In Figure 2(a), as there is
only one data flow (from S1 to D1), so the end-to-end delay is
6 slots. In Figure 2(b), there are two flows interfering with one
another, so the end-to-end delay from S1 to D1 is increased to
10 slots.
When there is multiple numbers of data flows in the network, it
is not straight forward to find out the optimal transmission
schedule that would leads to the minimum delay. In this paper,
we propose a linear programming-based data aggregation
scheduling scheme with SPR that compute time slot assignment
in order to minimise end-to-end delay without having any
conflict in transmission. The main contribution of our paper is
that we have introduced a linear model to closely study the
impact of interference on network delay in multi hop wireless
network. Comparison with previous linear models, our linear
model is more accurate; and also compared to exact solution,
which is NP-hard for computation, our solution is more
efficient one.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows. In section 2, we
briefly survey the related work on delay optimization and
interference modelling in recent years; in section 3, we present
a linear programming based scheduling scheme with SPR; in
section 4, we validate our model by simulation results. And at
last, section 5 concludes the paper.
2. RELATED WORK
We firstly surveyed the interference modelling, and then we
review recent work in the optimization of delay. For
interference modelling, the related work includes [1]-[6]. [1]
uses the conflict graph that model the effect of wireless
interference under a simplified protocol model; [3] continued to
use conflict graphs to model interference under the IEEE
802.11 interference model; [6] focused on estimation of
interference and studied the effect of interference on
aggregated network throughput based on the IEEE 802.11
model; [4] proposed a physical interference model based on the
measured interference rather than the distance between the
nodes. Our previous work [9] did joint routing and link rate
control using a different interference model for directed graphs.
Delay optimization is very important in wireless sensor
networks, has been approached from routing, MAC layer
scheduling or both. [10] presented in sensor networks when the
routing tree is given, how to determine the time slot of each
node such that the maximum latency to send the packet from a
node to the sink is minimized. [11] presented an algorithm to
find the optimal routing paths between the sensor and the sink
with the objective of minimizing the total end-to-end delay.
[12] presented approximation algorithms for minimum latency
aggregation in sensor networks, which computes on
aggregation tree as well as time slot assignment for links so
that the timespan of the schedule is minimized.
3. MINIMUM DELAY SCHEDULING WITH SPR
We assumed that the channel time has been divided into super-
frames. Each super-frames contains F number of distinct time
slots, and the slot duration is enough large for transmission of
single packet. In this paper we focused on the centralized
scheduling scheme; the distributed implementation of this will
be addressed for researches in future work.
When an intermediate node forwards a packet, there is a
mandatory store and forward delay and a scheduling delay.
While the total of store-and-forward delay is decided by the
total number of hops in the route, the scheduling delay has to
be decided by the particular transmission schedule, which is
influenced by the interference from other sensor nodes.
Providing routing information, we can further minimize end-to-
end delay by optimizing link scheduling. End-to-end delay is
related to both the scheduling delay at each relay node and the
total number of hops. When the routing information is given,
the delay factor can be optimized.
To achieve minimum scheduling delay with SPR, we first
formulate it as an optimization problem. As the routing
information is provided, so we use 1 to indicate link l is having
flow on the path, otherwise 0. To transmit packet from source
to destination we follow SPR with the scheduling scheme i.e.
data is aggregated from sources to a single aggregation node
Manpreet Singh et al., International Journal of Wireless Communications and Network Technologies, 3(5), August September 2014, 78-81
80

using SPR and then transmitted to the sink. So that there will
be less interference in the network and hence end-to-end delay
will be minimized.
4. SIMULATION
In this section, results of SPR+SCH and simulation parameters
are shown. A routing scheme Shortest Path Routing (SPR), and
a link level scheduling algorithm SCH is used. SCH uses the
routing information from the network layer for link level
transmission scheduling and can be used with any routing
algorithm. In SCH, an aggregation node is selected which
collected the data from the near source nodes in its range by
SPR. In SPR, a router choose the shortest path (in hops) to
reach the destination regardless of other transmissions.The tool
used for simulation is MATLAB. It is a high performance
language used for technical computing, and makes
programming in an easy to use environment where it is easy to
implement mathematical formulae of particular problem and its
solution.
Table 1, shows the parameters used for the simulation, we
create three scenarios, where we use 40, 60 and 80 nodes
deployed in a 150m*150m square region, with node
transmission range 30m. 20% nodes are selected randomly as
source nodes. Each source node sends data and through multi-
hop forwarding the data is delivered to the destination. For
each scenario, we repeat the simulation by varying number of
nodes and obtained the delay.
Table 1 Simulation Parameters for SPR+SCH
Parameter Name Parameters
Channel type Channel/ wireless
Radio Propagation Two Ray Ground
Antenna Type Antenna/ Omni Antenna
Link Layer type LL
Area of network 150m * 150m
Number of nodes 40, 60 and 80
Network Interface Type Phy/Wireless Phy
Position of sink 150,150
Range 30
Routing protocol SPR
Source nodes 20%

Figure 3 shows the end-to-end delay for SPR+SCH with
respect to number of nodes. Delay is the difference of time
period of time period between the data sending at the senders
end and the data receiving at the receiving end. It shows the
delay time of all successfully transmitted data from source end
to the receiving end. For the scenario with 40 nodes the delay
obtained is 21.0151, for 60 nodes the delay obtained is 39.7396
and for that of 80 nodes the delay obtained is 55.0595. It is
shown in the graph that maximum delay is for 80 nodes and
minimum is for 40 nodes when delay plotted in a common
graph for all three scenarios with respect to number of nodes.

Figure 3: Delay graph of SPR+SCH

Figure 4: Comparison graph between proposed technique and existing
techniques
Manpreet Singh et al., International Journal of Wireless Communications and Network Technologies, 3(5), August September 2014, 78-81
81

In the Figure 4, the comparison graph is obtained between the
proposed technique and existing techniques on the basis of
delay with respect to number of nodes. By our results we
concluded that our proposed technique has minimum delay
when compared with that of existing techniques or we can say
that our proposed technique transmit more data than that of
existing techniques.
The existing techniques used for the comparison are
SPR+MinDelay and SPR+FCFS. Also we observed that no
matter which MAC layer scheduling scheme is used, SPR
always performs better.
And in table 2, the tabular representation of proposed technique
and other existing techniques is represented for three scenarios
by varying the number of nodes that is for 40, 60 and 80 nodes.
Table 2 Comparison table of delay for Proposed Technique with
Existing techniques
NUMBER
OF NODES
SPR +
MinDelay
SPR +
FCFS
Proposed
Technique
40 23 39 21.0151
60 40 70 39.7396
80 65 129 55.0595

5. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we worked on important problem in practice:
given a multi hop wireless sensor network having multiple data
flows, the way to achieve the minimum end-to-end delay. This
paper presented a proposed technique SPR+SCH, in which the
impact of interference is considered. Our proposed technique
guarantees collision-free transmission and also does not need to
solve the NP-hard clique problem.The model for optimization
is very useful for feasibility analysis for a given set of Quality
of Service constraints, and also for improving delay when
routing information is provided.
REFERENCES
[1] K. Jain, J. Padhye, V. N. Padmanabhan, and L. Qiu,
Impact of interference on multi-hop wireless network
performance, in MobiCom 03: Proceedings of the 9th
annual internationalconference on Mobile computing and
networking. NewYork, NY, USA: ACM, 2003, pp. 6680.


[2] S. Rangwala, R. Gummadi, R. Govindan, and K. Psounis,
Interference-aware fair rate control in wireless sensor
networks, in SIGCOMM 06: Proceedings of the 2006
conferenceon Applications, technologies, architectures, and
protocols forcomputer communications. New York, NY, USA:
ACM, 2006,pp. 6374.
[3] Y. Li, L. Qiu, Y. Zhang, R. Mahajan, Z. Zhong, G.
Deshpande, and E. Rozner, Effects of interference on
wireless mesh networks: Pathologies and a preliminary
solution, in HotNets2007, Nov. 2007.
[4] L. Qiu, Y. Zhang, F. Wang, M. K. Han, and R. Mahajan, A
general model of wireless interference, in MobiCom
07:Proceedings of the 13th annual ACM international
conferenceon Mobile computing and networking. New York,
NY, USA: ACM, 2007, pp. 171182.
[5] Y. Li, L. Qiu, Y. Zhang, R. Mahajan, and E. Rozner,
Predictable performance optimization for wireless
networks, in SIGCOMM 08: Proceedings of the ACM
SIGCOMM 2008conference on Data communication. New
York, NY, USA: ACM, 2008, pp. 413426.
[6] J. Padhye, S. Agarwal, V. N. Padmanabhan, L. Qiu, A. Rao,
and B. Zill, Estimation of link interference in static multi-
hop wireless networks, in IMC 05: Proceedings of the 5th
ACMSIGCOMM conference on Internet Measurement.
Berkeley, CA, USA: USENIX Association, 2005, pp. 2828.
[7] M. Kodialam and T. Nandagopal, Characterizing
achievable rates in multi-hop wireless networks: the joint
routing and scheduling problem, in MobiCom 03:
Proceedings of the9th annual international conference on
Mobile computing andnetworking. New York, NY, USA:
ACM, 2003, pp. 4254.
[8] M. Alicherry, R. Bhatia, and L. Li, Joint channel
assignment and routing for throughput optimization in
multiradio wireless mesh networks, in ACM MobiCom,
2005.
[9] M. Cheng, X. Gong, and L. Cai, Link rate allocation
under bandwidth and energy constraints in sensor
networks, in IEEEGLOBECOM, Dec. 2008, pp. 15.
[10] P. Chatterjee and N. Das, A cross-layer distributed
tdma scheduling for data gathering with minimum latency
in wireless sensor networks, in Wireless VITAE 2009, May
2009, pp. 813 817.
[11] F. Sivrikaya and B. Yener, Minimum delay routing for
wireless networks with stdma, Wireless Networks, vol. 15,
no. 6, pp. 755772, October 2007.
[12] P.-J. Wan, S. C.-H.Huang, L. Wang, Z. Wan, and X. Jia,
Minimum-latency aggregation scheduling in multihop
wireless networks, in MobiHoc 09, 2009, pp. 185194.