International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology- volume3Issue5- 2012

AN OVERVIEW MOBILITY EFFECT ON TRASMISSION ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN MOBILE AD-HOC NETWORKS

Manmohan Singh1, Priyanka Borana2
Computer Department, Agarwal P.G. College,Mertacity,

Abstract In mobile Ad-hoc networks transmission energy is much important. Energy conservation is important issue in MANET because mobile nodes are basically battery powered and cannot function without proper power level. How transmission energy consumption affected mobility. Many authors publish related work. In this paper we try to make a summary on the work done by researchers related to this. Keywords Mobility, Mobile Adhoc Networks, Transmission Energy Consumption.

I. INTRODUCTION The explosion of wireless communication and mobile devices in recent years has opened the door of research on selforganizing networks that do not require a pre-established infrastructure. This type of networks, normally called Ad Hoc networks. These networks provide mobile users with everywhere communication capacity and information access regardless of location. The most important characteristic of such networks is the independence of any fixed infrastructure or centralized administration. An Ad Hoc network is capable of operating autonomously and is completely self-organizing and selfconfiguring. So, it can be rapid and easily deployable. Another important property of an Ad Hoc network is multi-hop capability. Unlike the cellular networks, which are single hop wireless networks, an Ad Hoc network does not guarantee that a mobile node can directly communicate with destinations all the time. A mobile node, which lies outside the transmission of its specific destination, would need to relay its information flow through other mobile nodes. This implies that mobile nodes in Ad Hoc networks bear routing functionality so that they can act both as routers and hosts. The Ad Hoc networks can be seen in to two categories whether dynamically changing their position or not, once create communication link. These are wireless sensor networks and Mobile Ad Hoc networks (MANETs). Wireless sensor networks mobile nodes are deployed in large number on small area. Once the nodes are deployed, they are static. In Mobile Ad Hoc networks the nodes are dynamically change their position. An Ad Hoc network can be used in an area where infrastructures for mobile communication are not available, probably due to high deployment costs or disaster destruction. The typical application of Ad Hoc networks includes battle

field communication, emergency relief and extension of the coverage area of cellular networks [1]. Routing is one of the key issues in MANETs due to their highly dynamic and distributed nature. Ad-hoc routing algorithms broadly can be categorized into pro-active and ondemand routing algorithm. The on-demand routing algorithms initiate to find out the suitable route when a route is requested [15]. The pro-active routing algorithm exchanges routing information periodically and generates the routing table in advance of route request [2]. These protocols select the routes based on the metrics of minimum hop count. Energy efficiency routing is of paramount significance for MANETs design, since the mobile nodes in such networks are typically battery powered. Power failure of a mobile node does not only affect the node itself but also its ability to forward packets on behalf of others and thus the overall network lifetime [16]. II. OVERVIEW ON WORK A mobile Ad-hoc network is characterized by constraints such as limited bandwidth, energy constraints, less memory and processing capabilities. Also MANETs are required to be deployed under scalable conditions for some applications. A routing protocol is a central to the design of such networks [3]. Optimum energy conservation is also an important issue in MANET because mobile nodes are battery powered and cannot function without enough power level. As devices are being designed to be smaller (Cell phones, PDAs, digital cameras), communication energy cost becomes a more significant portion of the total power consumed. In situations such as emergency rescue, military actions conservation plays an even more important by the network. Therefore, energy conservation should be considered carefully when designing or evaluating Ad-hoc routing protocols. In reality, the performance of mobile and Ad-hoc networks will depend on many factors such as traffic pattern, radio interference, node mobility model, network topology, obstacle positions, and so on. It is difficult to cover all these factors in simulation study of Ad-hoc routing protocols. For simplicity, most of easily simulation work used only one mobility model, Random way point [5][6], to evaluate Ad-hoc routing protocols. This model is widely used in most simulation studies. Random way point represents typical random node

ISSN: 2231-2803

http://www.internationaljournalssrg.org

Page 674

International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology- volume3Issue5- 2012

movement pattern but could be unrealistic in many real situations. A few different mobility models have been developed to model different Ad-hoc network environments other than entirely random movements. Reference Point Group Mobility Model (RPGMM)[7] is used to describe scenarios where users move in groups. It is very useful to model events such as conference, ask gallery exhibition and military actions. Manhattan grid [8] is another for describing user movement in downtown area where street topology is grid-like, as in man hat tan of New York City. Very few simulation studies have been done regarding different mobility models and none of them has addressed the energy performance of Ad-hoc routing protocols in different mobility patterns. Broch et al [5] compared the four Ad-hoc routing protocols (DSR, AODV, DSDV and TORA) in terms of packet delivery radio, routing overhead, and path optimality. They created wireless mobile supported for ns-2 [9] simulation environment and implemented the four routing protocols. This work provides detailed performance analysis on Ad-hoc routing protocols but energy performance was not addressed and only Random way point mobility model. Random way point is the most widely used mobility model used in evaluation of Adhoc routing protocols. It was first used by Johnson and Maltz [5] in the performance evaluation of DSR. An analysis by yoon et al [10] has indicated that Random way point model may produce unreliable results in simulations because the average node speed decreases over time and tend to be close to minimum speed. To model realistic motion patterns of mobile users, hong et al.[7] Proposed the group mobility model Reference Point Group Mobility (RPGM) which describes nodes moving in groups. Comp et al [11] provide a comprehensive survey of mobility models used in simulating Ad-hoc networks. Mobility models are divided into two categories: entity mobility model and group mobility model. Entity mobility model specifies individual node movement. Group mobility model describes group movement as well as individual node movement inside groups. Waal and Gerharz developed Born Motion [12], a software package used to generate many standard mobility patterns. It is capable of producing Random way point, RPGM, Manhattan Grid, and Gauss Markov mobility patterns which can be fed into different network simulators such as ns-2 and GloMoSim [13]. In calculating power consumed by the network during simulation, we need an energy consumption model for the wireless network devices. Feeney has proposed a linear energy consumption model [18] for performance analysis of MANET routing protocols. Cano and Manzoin [14] use ns-2 to compare the energy cans emption of DSR, AODV,TORA and DSDV. A new energy model has been proposed for the cluster heads that considers several factors like the traffic load, network density and the total transmission power utilized in handling the cluster members. Cluster maintenance overhead is aimed to reduce by electing Volunteer and non-volunteer cluster heads from time to time. III. CONCLUSION Optimum energy consumption is very important matter in MANET because mobile nodes are often battery mobile nodes are often battery powered and cannot work without enough power level. Works of all the researchers discussed in this paper have value in their own scenarios. IV. ABBREVIATION MANET Mobile Ad hoc Networks RPGM Reference Point Group Mobility Model GloMoSim Global Mobile Information System Simulator DSR Dynamic Source Routing DSDV Destination Sequenced Distance-Vector Routing PDA Personal Digital Assistant

References
[1] Andrea Goldsmith and Stephen B. Wicker, Design challenges for energy-constrained ad hoc wireless networks. IEEE Wirleess Communications, August 2002. C. Perkins, P. Bhagwat, Highly dynamic Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector routing (DSDV) for mobile computers, Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, August 1994. Shrirang Ambaji Kulkarni And G Raghavendra Rao, A Performance Analysis Of Energy Efficient Routing In Monile Ad Hoc Networks. Bor-rong Chang And C. Hwa Chang, Mobility Impact on Energy Conservation of Ad Hoc Routing Protocols . Josh Broch,David A.Maltz,David B.Johnson,Yih-Chun Hu,Jorjeta Jetcheva, A Performance Comparison of Multi-Hop Wireless Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols,in Proc.MobiCom98,Dallas,TX,Oct.1998. David B.Johnson and David A.Maltz,Dynamic Source Routing in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks, in Mobile Computing,(ed.T.Imielinski and H.Korth), Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996. X.Hong, M.Gerla, G. Pei, and C.-C.Chiang, A Group Mobility Model for Ad Hoc Wireless Networks, in Proc. Of ACM/IEEEMSWiM99,Seattle,WA,Aug.1999. Universal Mobile Telecommunication System (UMTS) ,Selection Procedures for the Choice of Radio Transmission Technologies , of the UMTS( TS30.03 v3.2.0). TS 30.03 3GPP,April 1998. The Network Simulator ns-2.http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/.2003. J.Yoon, M.Liu and B.Noble, Random Waypoint Considerred Harmful, in Proc.IEEE INFOCOM2003, San Francisco,CA,April 2003. T.Camp,J.Boleng,and V.Davies, A Survey of Mobility Models for Ad Hoc Network Research, in Wireless Communication & Mobile Computing(WCMC): Special issue on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking: Research Trends and Applications, vol.2,no. 5,pp.483-502,2002. Christain de Waal and Michael Gerharz, BonnMotion : a mobility scenario generation and analysis tool ,Communication Systems group , Institute of Computer Sc.IV,University of Bonn,Germany. GloMoSim,http:/pcl.cs.ucla.edu/projects/glomosim/,2003. Juan-Carlos Cano, Pietro Manzoni, A Performance Comparison of Energy Consumption for Mobile Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols, in Proc. IEEE/ACM MASCOTS 2000.

[2]

[3] [4] [5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9] [10]

[11]

[12]

[13] [14]

ISSN: 2231-2803

http://www.internationaljournalssrg.org

Page 675

International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology- volume3Issue5- 2012

[15] D. B. Johnson, D. A. Maltz, Yih-Chun Hu and Jorjeta G. Jetcheva, The Dynamic Source Routing for Mobile Ad Hoc Wireless Networks, http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-dsr-09.txt, IETF Internet draft, Nov. 2001 [Accessed May 17, 2007] Chansu Yu, Ben Lee Hee and Yong Youn, Energy Efficient routing protocols for mobile ad-hoc networks, http://web.engr.oregonstate.edu/~benl/Publications/Journals/WCMC03 .pdf [Accessed June 4,2007] [17] Suchismita Chinara , Santanu Kumar Rath, Energy Efficient Mobility Adaptive Distributed Clustering Alogrithm for Mobile Ad Hoc Network, pg no 265-272(2009). Feeney , L.M., An energy consumption model for performance analysis of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks, Mobile Netowrks and Application Vol.3,No.6,June 2001.

[18]

[16]

ISSN: 2231-2803

http://www.internationaljournalssrg.org

Page 676