Energy-Aware Scalable Reliable and Void-Hole Mitigation Routing for Sparsely Deployed Underwater Acoustic Networks

Abstract

In wireless underwater sensor networks (WUSNs), network protocols for information routing are usually designed when a significant number of nodes are present in the network. Therefore, for sparse conditions, when a noticeable reduction in the number of nodes occurs, the performance of such protocols exhibits a degraded behavior pattern. To cope with routing issues when sparse conditions prevail, two routing algorithms for WUSNs are proposed in this paper. They are energy-aware scalable reliable and void-hole mitigation routing (ESRVR) and cooperative energy-aware scalable reliable and void-hole mitigation routing (Co-ESRVR). The ESRVR uses a number of strategies. Firstly, it uses two hop neighbors’ information to develop routing trajectories for information advancement, as one hop information cannot avoid a void-hole, a condition when a node is not able to find neighbors towards the sea surface, and more than two hop information is difficult to obtain when sparse conditions prevail. Secondly, when a void-hole still exists, the protocol uses a backward transmission mechanism to find other routing paths to deliver packets to the end target. Thirdly, the time by which a packet is held by a node prior to transmission is short for the nodes with low energy, depth and high count of neighbors. This reduces packets loss and avoids congestion of the channel. It also helps the nodes with no or few neighbors to hold the packet for a significant chunk of time until they find suitable neighbors, due to sea tides and currents, for further packets’ advancement. The Co-ESRVR further adds reliability to information advancement by adding routing in a cooperative fashion to ESRVR, which involves packets advancement to destination along two paths: directly from source and via a relayed path. This provides multiple paths for data advancement to the sea surface, so that if one path is badly affected by the harsh sea characteristics, others may not be. Unlike the counterpart protocol, the proposed algorithms are not dependent on a node’s geographical location or the distance from the sea surface, which increases their scalability and reduces the computational complexity. Performance analysis displays superior behavior patterns of the proposed algorithms over the counterpart in terms of the compared characteristics.

REVOHPR: Relay-based Void Hole Prevention and Repair by Virtual Routing in Clustered Multi-AUV Underwater Wireless Sensor Network

“…In this section, the simulation results are presented for the proposed REVOHPR protocol is evaluated in terms of energy consumption, packet delivery ratio, and throughput for effective data transmission and hole detection and repair mechanisms. In addition, the proposed ReVHR protocol is compared to similar UWSN protocols such as ESRVR [34], ACMC [36], and PSO [32,38]. The detailed description of the simulation environment and comparative study are specified as follows.…”

“…Authors in [34] focuses on void hole detection and mitigation in underwater sensor network. For that, two routing schemes are proposed.…”

Energy-Aware and Reliability-Based Localization-Free Cooperative Acoustic Wireless Sensor Networks

“…The amount of start-up energy for every node is considered 11 J. The source node exchanges a hello packet with a size of 8 bytes [43] and 50 bytes [44] for a single packet. The proposed protocols, evaluate the following parameters by using evaluation metrics.…”

Underwater sensor networks: ‘Comparative analysis on applications, deployment and routing techniques’

“…Two routing algorithms are introduced in [72], they are energy‐aware scalable reliable and void‐hole mitigation routing (ESRVR) and Co‐operative ‐ESRVR. Three different strategies are applied by ESRVR they are (i) two‐hop neighbour's information to improve the information by developing the routing trajectories, (ii) apply backward transmission mechanism during the existence of void‐hole to find substitute path to reach the destination, and (iii) the time taken to hold the packet before transmission is less.…”