Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks: How Do Acoustic Propagation Models Impact the Performance of Higher-Level Protocols?

Several Medium Access Control (MAC) and routing protocols have been developed in the last years for Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks (UWSNs). One of the main difficulties to compare and validate the performance of different proposals is the lack of a common standard to model the acoustic propagation in the underwater environment. In this paper we analyze the evolution of underwater acoustic prediction models from a simple approach to more detailed and accurate models. Then, different high layer network protocols are tested with different acoustic propagation models in order to determine the influence of environmental parameters on the obtained results. After several experiments, we can conclude that higher-level protocols are sensitive to both: (a) physical layer parameters related to the network scenario and (b) the acoustic propagation model. Conditions like ocean surface activity, scenario location, bathymetry or floor sediment composition, may change the signal propagation behavior. So, when designing network architectures for UWSNs, the role of the physical layer should be seriously taken into account in order to assert that the obtained simulation results will be close to the ones obtained in real network scenarios.

[1]  Ian F. Akyildiz,et al.  State of the art in protocol research for underwater acoustic sensor networks , 2006, MOCO.

[2]  Milica Stojanovic,et al.  A simulation analysis of large scale path loss in an underwater acoustic network , 2011, OCEANS 2011 IEEE - Spain.

[3]  Giuseppe Di Battista,et al.  26 Computer Networks , 2004 .

[4]  Milica Stojanovic,et al.  Focused beam routing protocol for underwater acoustic networks , 2008, Underwater Networks.

[5]  William G Van Dorn,et al.  Oceanography and Seamanship , 1974 .

[6]  Ian F. Akyildiz,et al.  State of the art in protocol research for underwater acoustic sensor networks , 2007 .

[7]  Manuel P. Malumbres,et al.  Analyzing the behavior of acoustic link models in underwater wireless sensor networks , 2009, PM2HW2N '09.

[8]  Robert J. Urick,et al.  Principles of underwater sound , 1975 .

[9]  Kevin B. Smith.  CONVERGENCE, STABILITY, AND VARIABILITY OF SHALLOW WATER ACOUSTIC PREDICTIONS USING A SPLIT-STEP FOURIER PARABOLIC EQUATION MODEL , 2001 .

[10]  Josep Miquel Jornet Montana.  AUVNetSim: a Simulator for Underwater Acoustics Networks , 2008 .

[11]  Michele Zorzi,et al.  World ocean simulation system (WOSS): a simulation tool for underwater networks with realistic propagation modeling , 2009, WUWNet.

[12]  M. Porter,et al.  Gaussian beam tracing for computing ocean acoustic fields , 1987 .

[13]  W. Kuperman,et al.  Fundamentals of Ocean Acoustics , 2011 .

[15]  Milica Stojanovic,et al.  Distance aware collision avoidance protocol for ad-hoc underwater acoustic sensor networks , 2007, IEEE Communications Letters.

[16]  J. Gibson,et al.  Incorporating Realistic Acoustic Propagation Models in Simulation of Underwater Acoustic Networks: A Statistical Approach , 2006, OCEANS 2006.

[17]  V. S. Vladimirov,et al.  Equations of mathematical physics , 1972 .

[18]  Norman M. Abramson,et al.  Development of the ALOHANET , 1985, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[19]  Manuel P. Malumbres,et al.  Performance evaluation of underwater wireless sensor networks with OPNET , 2011, SimuTools.

[20]  Michael B. Porter,et al.  Computational Ocean Acoustics , 1994 .

[21]  H. S. Wolff,et al.  iRun: Horizontal and Vertical Shape of a Region-Based Graph Compression , 2022, Sensors.