PIES: Protocol Independent
Energy Saving Algorithm
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  | Yasser Gadallah | 
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  | Thomas Kunz | 
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  | August 15, 2004 | 
Presentation Outline
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  | Energy Consumption in Mobile Ad Hoc
  Networks | 
 
  |  | Proposed Solution: PIES | 
 
  |  | PIES Evaluation | 
 
  |  | Conclusions | 
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  |  | 
Energy Consumption In
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  | Many sources of energy consumption
  exist in mobile nodes e.g. screens, HDD, interfaces, etc | 
 
  |  | Our focus is energy consumed in
  wireless interfaces | 
 
  |  | Energy is consumed in sending,
  receiving, idle and sleep modes of operation | 
 
  |  | It is crucial for energy conservation
  that we eliminate or reduce wasted idle energy consumption which constitutes
  a large portion of energy consumption is wireless interfaces | 
 
  |  | To do this, ideally nodes need to be
  put to sleep when idle to save this wasted energy | 
Proposed Solution: PIES -
Goals
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  | Fair energy conservation: all nodes are
  treated equally | 
 
  |  | Complements existing routing algorithms
  from energy conservation perspective | 
 
  |  | Functionality that is independent of
  the underlying routing protocol | 
 
  |  | Little or no impact on network
  operation – no additional major traffic | 
 
  |  |  | 
Proposed Solution: PIES -
Characteristics
 
  |  |  |  | 
 
  |  | Achieves fair energy conservation by: | 
 
  |  | Putting nodes to sleep for equal time
  periods | 
 
  |  | Providing the routing algorithm with
  energy threshold info to help it make fair energy conscious decisions | 
 
  |  | Fully distributed algorithm –
  functionality does not depend on a node or a set of nodes | 
 
  |  | Modular nature – easily integrated with
  existing routing algorithms | 
 
  |  | Ability to determine with certainty
  neighbors’ sleep state | 
 
  |  | Configurable in such a way that
  introduces no additional traffic to the network | 
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  |  | 
PIES Evaluation – Energy
Performance
PIES Evaluation – Packet
Delivery Performance
PIES Evaluation – Summary
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  | PIES introduces energy savings of about
  50% for the conditions we used | 
 
  |  | It also extends network lifetime by
  about 70% | 
 
  |  | This is done while achieving higher
  fairness than in the case of the routing protocol alone | 
 
  |  | The resulting PDR is comparable to that
  of the routing protocol alone | 
 
  |  | Packet delivery latency increases with
  the increase of the ST/WT ratio | 
Conclusions
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  | Energy is the most scarce resource for
  the functionality of mobile ad hoc networks | 
 
  |  | PIES is a solution that achieves fair
  energy conservation and works with existing routing algorithms | 
 
  |  | Simulations show that PIES achieves
  energy savings of about 50% and extends network lifetime by about 70% | 
Backup Slides
Ad Hoc Network Energy
Management Issues – Energy Conservation Challenges
 
  |  |  |  | 
 
  |  | Energy conservation mechanisms should
  not add significant energy consumption or traffic demands on the network | 
 
  |  | It should be able to answer the
  following questions: | 
 
  |  | When to put the node to sleep without
  knowledge of traffic patterns? | 
 
  |  | When to wake the node up? | 
 
  |  | What is the sleep state of a neighbor? | 
 
  |  | If the neighbor is asleep when will it
  wake up? | 
 
  |  | There should be no major effect on the
  normal network functionality (e.g. no major traffic loss) | 
 
  |  |  | 
 
  |  |  | 
Energy-Efficient Schemes
- Issues
 
  |  |  |  | 
 
  |  | Most routing energy-efficient schemes
  ignored idle energy consumption in their analysis | 
 
  |  | Non-routing energy-efficient schemes
  suffered one or more of the following issues: | 
 
  |  | No attention given to energy fairness
  among network nodes | 
 
  |  | Unrealistic assumptions e.g. traffic
  nodes do not forward traffic | 
 
  |  | Algorithm design tied to a specific
  underlying routing strategy | 
 
  |  | Large impact on the functionality of
  the underlying routing scheme | 
 
  |  | No interaction with underlying routing
  protocol which results in unnecessary loss of traffic | 
 
  |  | Heuristic methodology in determining
  neighbors’ sleep state | 
Proposed Solution: PIES -
Operation