This document proposes DELAR, a Device-Energy-Load Aware Routing protocol for heterogeneous mobile ad hoc networks. DELAR aims to reduce energy consumption and improve end-to-end delay by selecting P-nodes (powerful nodes) to relay traffic when possible. It introduces algorithms for P-node neighbor discovery, hybrid transmission scheduling, an asymmetric MAC protocol, and multi-packet transmission. Simulation results show that DELAR achieves lower energy consumption, higher packet delivery ratio, and lower delay compared to existing protocols, especially with increased node mobility, number of P-nodes, or traffic load. Future work is suggested to integrate DELAR with zone routing protocols.

1. AN EFFICIENT ENERGY CONSERVATION
IN HETEROGENEOUS MOBILE ADHOC
NETWORK
GUIDED BY, PRESENTED BY,
Mrs.V.Bhanumathi P.N.Ganesh
Asst Prof, Dept Of ECE II year M.E Communication Systems
Anna University of Technology, Anna University of Technology,
Coimbatore Coimbatore
1

2. OBJECTIVE
To reduce the energy consumption and to improve the end-to-end
delay performance.
To prolong the lifetime of the network with some P-node
existence.
2

3. EXISTING PROBLEMS
 P-node’s in B-node’s Vicinity.
 Path selection.
 Transmission range of P-node.
 Transmission scheduling.
3

4. LITERATURE SURVEY
Energy Aware Routing protocol
P-node and B-node has same transmission range in the network and
this protocol should minimize the total energy consumed by the
Network.
EAR increases the number of hops to reach the destination which
leads to energy drain in the network.
EAR does not know how to provide MAC layer acknowledgments for
P-node in unidirectional links.
4

5. DEAR – A Device and Energy Aware Routing protocol
Arun avudainayagam, and W.Lou simulated the DEAR where it faced
some disadvantages.
 DEAR used modified version of MACA was used in MAC layer,
where it prevents the collision in the network.
Here the minimum cost to reach the P-node is done after the routing
table is updated.
Once a P-node receives a packet it checks for the destination is one of
its neighbour in just a single hop.
If not the P-node boost its transmission range
5

6. Operation of EAR, Minimum hop route and DEAR
6

7. Algorithm-Design of DELAR
P-node’s neighboring criteria.
Routing component of DELAR.
Hybrid Transmission scheduling.
Asymmetric Media Access Control protocol.
Multi-Packet Transmission Scheme.
7

8. P-node’s neighbor Discovery
 The forward path and backward path are decided for the neighbour selection,
the forward path is the path derived from the routing table.
 For TRpb i.e., any B-node X located in P’s transmission range has the backward
path (P,X) i.e., the minimum hop forward path (X,P) all the nodes have the
transmission range of BTR.
 Forward paths are for any nodes in the network whereas, backward path are
valid only between a P-node and the B-node in the TRpb.
 All the intermediate nodes along backward path(P,X) should be in P’s TRpb so
they may be P’s neighbor.
 TRpb = n BTR for covering B-nodes and TRpp = m BTR to find neighbor
among themselves.
8

9. Routing component of DELAR
β(i) = residual_energy(i) − μ queue_len(i)
residual energy(i) – remaining energy level at node i
queue_len(i) – current load status at node i
μ – energy consumption per unit data transmission
1/β(i), β(i) > γ
cost(i) =
a, β(i) ≤ γ
γ – parameter used to adjust the weight in overall cost.
a – large value to be used
9

10. Hybrid transmission scheduling
 Time is divided into time periods of equal length called superframes due
to the transmission power boost in P-node.
 P-nodes use high transmission power to communicate and determines
the lengths of P-to-P period, P-to-B period and B-to-B period.
 length of P-to-P period is tpp = l·k , k - neighboring P-node
 length of P-to-B period is tpb = d·mi max no of hops of backward path between
P-node i and its neighboring B-node is mi
 length of B-to-B period is tbb = q·b b - neighboring B-node
 Packet scheduling is needed at a P-node to determine the appropriate
transmission schedule for the packets to be relayed or initiated by itself.
10

11. Asymmetric media access control protocol (A-MAC)
 Based on IEEE 802.11 A-MAC introduce 4 frames : P-RTS, P-CTS, P-
DATA, P-ACK which are transmitted only in P-to-B periods.
 The P-node associated with this P-to-B period can send packets to any
neighboring B-node in the range of TRpb through P-RTS/P-CTS/P-DATA/P
ACK exchanges. 11

12. The Multi packet transmission scheme
 During P-to-B period A can only transmit packets to either B or C each
time. node C has to rely on B to relay its acknowledgements to A
because it is not within A’s BTR range.
 If multi-packet transmission is enabled, A would pack one packet for C
and another packet for B together, and send them in a single packet
from which nodes B and C can acquire their own part.
 By this the end-to-end delay is improved.
12

13. Simulation setup
Tools : Network simulator 2.34
Number of nodes : 30
Area : 1000 x 500m2
Basic transmission range : 200m
Transmission rate : 2Mbps
Mobility Model : RandomWay point
Simulation time : 500s
Vmax : 2 m/s to 16 m/s
No of P-Nodes : 2, 4 & 6
Initial energy of nodes : 1KJ
13

14. Simulation setup contd..
Pause time :0
Packet size : 512 bytes
Value of m and n : 4 and 2
Transmission power : 1560 mW
Reception power : 930 mW
14

15. Simulation Results - I
 Impact of the node mobility.
 Here the mobility speed of the nodes are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption, packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared.
15

16. AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
16

17. PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
17

18. AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NODES MOBILITY SPEED
18

19. Simulation Results - II
 Impact of the number of P-nodes.
 Here the number of P-nodes are varied and then the metric
performance such as energy consumption, packet delivery ratio
and the end-to-end delay are compared.
19

20. AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
20

21. PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
21

22. AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS NUMBER OF P-NODES
22

23. Simulation Results - III
 Impact of the Traffic Load.
 Here the generation of the data packets are varied and then the
metric performance such as energy consumption, packet delivery
ratio and the end-to-end delay are compared.
23

24. PACKET DELIVERY RATIO VS TRAFFIC LOAD
24

25. AVERAGE END-TO-END DELAY VS TRAFFIC LOAD
25

26. Future work
 To implement the DELAR with the ZRP (zone routing protocol).
 The choice of m and n.
26

27. REFERENCES
[1] W. Liu, Y. Zhang, W. Lou and Y. Fang (2011), “DELAR: A Device-
Energy-Load Aware Relaying in heterogenous mobile ad hoc networks,”
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 29, no. 8, pp. 1572-1584.
[2] A. Avudainayagam, W. Lou and Y. Fang (2003), “DEAR: A device
and energy aware routing protocol for heterogeneous ad hoc networks,”
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 228–
236.
27

28. [3] M. Pearlman and Z. Haas (1999), “Determining the optimal
configuration for the zone routing protocol,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas
Commun., vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 1395–1414.
[4] Shah V, Gelal E and Krishnamurthy S (2007), “Handling asymmetry
in power heterogeneous ad hoc networks,” in Computer Networks, Vol.
51, pp. 2594–2615.
[5] Jung E S and Vaidya N (2002), “A power control MAC protocol for
ad hoc networks,” in Proc. MobiCom.
28

29. THANK YOU
29