UNIT I OVERVIEW OF WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORK

The vision of Ambient Intelligence – Application Examples – Types of Applications –

Challenges for Wireless Sensor Networks – Comparison of Mobile ad hoc networks
and wireless sensor networks – Enabling Technologies for Wireless Sensor Networks.

THE VISION OF AMBIENT INTELLIGENCE

 Ranging from old fashioned mainframes to modern laptop or palmtops.

 Computation is integrated with control; it is embedded into a physical system
 Embedded system meet human interaction-based system

Ambient Intelligence

 Where many different devices will gather and process information from many
different sources to both control physical processes and to interact with human users.
 Transformation occurs from washing machine to wrist band, computation will
surround us in our daily lives.

Example:
 Ubiquitous Computing
 Person to person
 Person to machine
 Machine to machine.

Realization of vision

To realize this vision, a crucial aspect is needed in addition to computation and control:
communication.
For some application scenarios, such networks of sensors and actuators are easily built
using existing, wired networking technologies.
For many other application types, however, the need to wire together all these entities
constitutes a considerable obstacle to success:
Wiring is expensive, in particular, given the large number of devices that is imaginable in
our environment; wires constitute a maintenance problem; wires prevent entities from
being mobile; and wires can prevent sensors or actuators from being close to the
phenomenon that they are supposed to control.
Hence, wireless communication between such devices is, in many application scenarios,
an inevitable requirement

 In addition to computation and control, communication is needed.

 Transfer information to place where it is needed-an actuator or a user and they
should collaborate.
 Wiring is expensive (US$200 per sensor)

Problems caused by wires

 Maintenance
 Prevent entities from being mobile
 Prevent sensors from being close to the phenomenon that they are supposed to
control

Realizing such wireless sensor networks is a crucial step toward a deeply penetrating
Ambient Intelligence concept as they provide, figuratively, the “last 100 meters” of
pervasive control. To realize them, a better understanding of their potential
applications and the ensuing requirements is necessary, as is an idea of the enabling
technologies. These questions are answered in the following sections; a position of
wireless sensor networks and related networking concepts such as fieldbuses or mobile
ad hoc network is provided as well.

Physical Features:

 Rely on onboard batteries

 Acceptable size of an individual node
 Acceptable costs of an individual node higher accuracy
 Pervasive control
 To better understand the potential application
 Ensuing requirements
 Idea of the enabling technologies.

Wireless Sensor Networks

 Networks consist of individual nodes that are able to interact with their
environment by sensing or controlling physical environment
 These nodes have to collaborate to fulfill their tasks
 It is also known as actuator networks.

Infrastructure-based wireless
networks
• Typical wireless network: Based on
infrastructure
• E.g., GSM, UMTS, …
• Base stations connected to a wired
backbone network
• Mobile entities communicate wirelessly to
these base stations
• Traffic between different mobile entities is
relayed by base stations and wired backbone
• Mobility is supported by switching from one
base station to another
• Backbone infrastructure required for
administrative tasks
 •

Source and Sink nodes

 Source nodes are actual nodes that sense data

 Sinks are nodes where the data should be delivered to
 Sinks can either be part of network or outside of the networks

Application Examples

The claim of wireless sensor network proponents is that this technological vision will
facilitate many existing application areas and bring into existence entirely new ones.
This claim depends on many factors, but a couple of the envisioned application
scenarios shall be highlighted.
Apart from the need to build cheap, simple to program and network, potentially long-
lasting sensor nodes, a crucial and primary ingredient for developing actual applications
is the actual sensing and actuating faculties with which a sensor node can be endowed.
For many physical parameters, appropriate sensor technology exists that can be
integrated in a node of a WSN. Some of the few popular ones are temperature,
humidity, visual and infrared light (from simple luminance to cameras), acoustic,
vibration (e.g. for detecting seismic disturbances), pressure, chemical sensors (for gases
of different types or to judge soil composition), mechanical stress, magnetic sensors (to
detect passing vehicles), potentially even radar. But even more sophisticated sensing
capabilities are conceivable, for example, toys in a kindergarten might have tactile or
motion sensors or be able to determine their own speed or location.
Actuators controlled by a node of a wireless sensor network are perhaps not quite as
multifaceted. Typically, they control a mechanical device like a servo drive, or they
 might switch some electrical appliance by means of an electrical relay, like a lamp, a
bullhorn, or a similar device.
On the basis of nodes that have such sensing and/or actuation faculties, in combination
with computation and communication abilities, many different kinds of applications can
be constructed, with very different types of nodes, even of different kinds within one
application.

Disaster relief applications

 Drop sensor nodes from an aircraft over a wildfire

 Each node measures temperature
 Derive a “temperature map”
 Sensor nodes are equipped with thermometers and can determine their own
location
 These sensors are deployed over a wildfire, for example, a forest, from an airplane
 They collectively produce a “temperature map” of the area or determine the
perimeter of areas with high temperature that can be accessed from the outside,
 firefighters equipped with Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs)
 Some of these disaster relief applications have commonalities with military
applications, where sensors should detect
In such an application, sensors should be cheap enough to be considered disposable
since a large number is necessary; lifetime requirements are not particularly high.

Environment control and biodiversity mapping

 Use sensor nodes to observe wildlife

WSN can be used to control:
 the environment a possible application is garbage dump sites.
 the surveillance of the marine ground floor
 an understanding of its erosion processes is important for the construction of
offshore wind farms
 To gain an understanding of the number of plant and animal species that live in a
given habitat (biodiversity mapping).
Main Advantages:
The long term,unattended,High requirement
Often, a large number of sensors is required with rather high requirements regarding
lifetime.

Intelligent buildings
  Reduce energy wastage by proper humidity, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC)
control
 high-resolution monitoring of temperature, airflow, humidity, and other physical
parameters
 The main advantage here is the collaborative mapping of physical parameters- If
power supply is not available, lifetime requirements can be very high- but the
number of required nodes, and hence the cost, is relatively modest, given the costs
of an entire building.
 sensor nodes can be used to monitor mechanical stress levels of buildings in
seismically active zones
 Needs measurements about room occupancy, temperature, air flow, …
 Monitor mechanical stress after earthquakes
 Sensor can be retrofitted into existing buildings.

Facility management

 Keyless entry applications where people wear badges that allow a WSN to check
which person is allowed to enter which areas of a larger company site.
 extended to the detection of intruders
 wide area WSN could track such a vehicle’s position and alert security personnel
 WSN could be used in a chemical plant to scan for leaking chemicals
 Able to operate a long time on batteries.
 Intrusion detection into industrial sites and other restricted areas
 Control of leakages in chemical plants, …

Machine surveillance and preventive maintenance

 Is to fix sensor nodes to difficult to- reach areas of machinery where they can detect
vibration patterns that indicate the need for maintenance.
 Embed sensing/control functions into places no cable has gone before
 E.g., tire pressure monitoring

The main advantage of WSNs here is the cable free operation, avoiding a maintenance
problem in itself and allowing a cheap, often retrofitted installation of such sensors.
Wired power supply may or may not be available depending on the scenario;
if it is not available, sensors should last a long time on a finite supply of energy since
exchanging batteries is usually impractical and costly.
On the other hand, the size of nodes is often not a crucial issue, nor is the price very
heavily constrained.
Precision agriculture

 Bring out fertilizer/pesticides/irrigation only where needed

Applying WSN to agriculture allows precise irrigation and fertilizing by placing

humidity/soil composition sensors into the fields.
A relatively small number is claimed to be sufficient, about one sensor per 100 m × 100
m area.
Similarly, pest control can profit from a high-resolution surveillance of farm land.
Also, livestock breeding can benefit from attaching a sensor to each pig or cow, which
controls the health status of the animal (by checking body temperature, step counting,
or similar means) and raises alarms if given thresholds are exceeded.

Medicine and health care

 Post-operative or intensive care

 Long-term surveillance of chronically ill patients or the elderly

The use of WSN in health care applications is a potentially very beneficial, but also
ethically controversial, application.
Possibilities range from postoperative and intensive care, where sensors are directly
attached to patients – the advantage of doing away with cables is considerable here – to
the long-term surveillance of (typically elderly) patients and to automatic drug
administration (embedding sensors into drug packaging, raising alarms when applied to
the wrong patient, is conceivable).
Also, patient and doctor tracking systems within hospitals can be literally lifesaving.

Logistics

 It is conceivable to equip goods (individual parcels, for example) with simple sensors
that allow a simple tracking of these objects during transportation or facilitate
inventory tracking in stores or warehouses.
 Much simpler and cheaper than the active communication and information
processing , it is realized by so-called Radio Frequency Identifier (RF ID) tags.
 Equip goods (parcels, containers) with a sensor node
 Track their whereabouts –total asset management
 Note: passive readout might suffice –compare RF IDs

Telematics
  Sensors embedded in the streets or roadsides can gather information about traffic
conditions at a much finer grained resolution than what is possible today .Such a so
called “intelligent roadside”
 Provide better traffic control by obtaining finer-grained information about traffic
conditions
 Intelligent roadside
 Cars as the sensor nodes

Partially related to logistics applications are applications for the telematics context,

Application types for WSNs ,the literature include airplane wings and support for smart
spaces , applications in waste water treatment plants , instrumentation of
semiconductor processing chambers and wind tunnels , in “smart kindergartens” where
toys interact with children , the detection of floods, interactive museums , monitoring a
bird habitat on a remote island, and implanting sensors into the human body (for
glucose monitoring or as retina prosthesis).
Wireless sensor networks are to a large extent about providing the required information
at the required accuracy in time with as little resource consumption as possible.

TYPES OF APPLICATIONS

Many of these applications share some basic characteristics. In most of them, there is a
clear difference between
sources of data – the actual nodes that sense data – and
sinks – nodes where the data should be delivered to.

These sinks sometimes are part of the sensor network itself; sometimes they are clearly
systems “outside” the network (e.g. the firefighter’s PDA communicating with a WSN).
Also, there are usually, but not always, more sources than sinks and the sink is oblivious
or not interested in the identity of the sources; the data itself is much more important.

The interaction patterns between sources and sinks show some typical patterns. The
most relevant ones are:

Event detection

 Sensor nodes should report to the sink(s) once they have detected the occurrence
of a specified event.
 The simplest events can be detected locally by a single sensor node in isolation (e.g.
a temperature threshold is exceeded); more complicated types of events require
 the collaboration of nearby or even remote sensors to decide whether a
(composite) event has occurred (e.g. a temperature gradient becomes too steep).
 If several different events can occur, event classification might be an additional
issue.

Periodic measurements

Sensors can be tasked with periodically reporting measured values. Often, these reports
can be triggered by a detected event; the reporting period is application dependent.

Function approximation and edge detection

 The way a physical value like temperature changes from one place to another can
be regarded as a function of location.
 A WSN can be used to approximate this unknown function (to extract its spatial
characteristics), using a limited number of samples taken at each individual sensor
node.
 This approximate mapping should be made available at the sink.
 The approximation accuracy and the inherent trade-off against energy
consumption.
Similarly, a relevant problem can be to find areas or points of the same given value. An
example is to find the isothermal points in a forest fire application to detect the border
of the actual fire. This can be generalized to finding “edges” in such functions or to
sending messages along the boundaries of patterns in both space and/or time .

Tracking

 The source of an event can be mobile (e.g. an intruder in surveillance scenarios).

 The WSN can be used to report updates on the event source’s position to the
sink(s), potentially with estimates about speed and direction as well.
 These interactions can be scoped both in time and in space (reporting events only
within a given time span, only from certain areas, and so on).
 These requirements can also change dynamically overtime; sinks have to have a
means to inform the sensors of their requirements at runtime.
 Moreover, these interactions can take place only for one specific request of a sink
(so-called “one-shot queries”), or they could be long-lasting relationships between
many sensors and many sinks.
The examples also have shown a wide diversity in deployment options.
 They range from well planned, fixed deployment of sensor nodes (e.g. in machinery
maintenance applications) to random deployment by dropping a large number of
nodes from an aircraft over a forest fire.
 In addition, sensor nodes can be mobile themselves and compensate for
shortcomings in the deployment process by moving, in a post deployment phase, to
positions such that their sensing tasks can be better fulfilled.
 They could also be mobile because they are attached to other objects (in the
logistics applications) and the network has to adapt itself to the location of nodes.

The applications also influence the available maintenance options:

Is it feasible and practical to perform maintenance on such sensors – perhaps even

required in the course of maintenance on associated machinery? Is maintenance
irrelevant because these networks are only deployed in a strictly ad hoc, short-term
manner with a clear delimitation of maximum mission time (like in disaster recovery
operations)? Or do these sensors have to function unattended, for a long time, with no
possibility for maintenance?
Closely related to the maintenance options are the options for energy supply.
In some applications, wired power supply is possible and the question is mute. For self-
sustained sensor nodes, depending on the required mission time, energy supply can be
trivial (applications with a few days of usage only) or a challenging research problem,
especially when no maintenance is possible but nodes have to work for years.

CHALLENGES FOR WSNs

 Single realization is impossible

 Common traits w.r.t characteristics and Mechanisms
 Realization of these characteristics with new mechanisms is major challenge.

CHARACTERISTIC REQUIREMENTS

Type of service

 Not simply moving bits like another network

 Rather: provide answers(not just numbers)
 Issues like geographic scoping are natural requirements, absent from other
networks
 WSN is expected to provided meaningful information and/or actions about a given
task.
 “People want answers, not numbers”.
 Additionally, concepts like scoping of interactions to specific geographic regions or
to time intervals will become important.
 New paradigms of using such a network are required, along with new interfaces and
new way of thinking about the service of a network.

Quality of service
 Traditional quality of service requirements –Multimedia type applications like
bounded delay or minimum bandwidth are irrelevant when applications are
tolerant to latency or bandwidth of transmitted data is very small
 But, delay is important in real time scenarios. The packet delivery ratio is an
insufficient metric.
 Adapted quality concepts like reliable detection of events or the approximation
quality of a, say, temperature map is important.

Fault tolerance

 Nodes run out of energy or might be damaged and wireless communication

between two nodes can be permanently interrupted
 Redundant deployment is necessary.
 Using more nodes than would be strictly necessary if all nodes functioned
correctly.
Life time

 The network should fulfill its task as long as possible –definition depends on
application.
 Lifetime of individual nodes relatively unimportant .But often treated equivalently
 Nodes depend on batteries
 WSN must operate for a given mission time or as long as possible.
 Alternative, solar cell might be supplement to energy supplies.
 Lifetime has direct trade-offs against QoS: investing more energy can increase
quality but decrease lifetime.
 The precise definition of lifetime depends on the application at hand.
 A simple option is to use the time until the first node fails (or runs out of energy) as
the network lifetime.
 Other options include the time until the network is disconnected in two or more
partitions, the time until 50% (or some other fixed ratio) of nodes have failed, or
the time when for the first time a point in the observed region is no longer covered
by at least a single sensor node.
Scalability

 WSN might include a large number of nodes, the employed architectures and
protocols must be able to scale to these numbers.
 Support large number of nodes

Wide range of densities

 Number of nodes per unit area-the density of the network can vary considerably.
 Different applications will have very different node densities
 Density can vary over time and space because nodes fail or move.
 Density also does not have to homogeneous in network and the network should
adapt to such variations.

Programmability

 Nodes should posses the capability to react flexibly on changes in their tasks.
 Re-programming of nodes in the field might be necessary, improve flexibility.
 These nodes should be programmable
 Their programming must be changeable during operation when new tasks become
Important.
 A fixed way of information processing is insufficient.

Maintainability
 As both the environment of a WSN and the WSN itself change (Depleted batteries,
failing nodes, new tasks), the system has to adapt.
 It has to change operational parameters or to choose different trade-offs based on
requirements e.g. provide lower quality when energy resource become scarce.
 WSN has to adapt to changes, self-monitoring, adapt operation
 Incorporate possible additional resources, e.g., newly deployed nodes

REQUIRED MECHANISM

To realize these requirements, innovative mechanisms for a communication

network have to be found, as well as new architectures, and protocol concepts.
A particular challenge here is the need to find mechanisms that are sufficiently specific
to the idiosyncrasies of a given application to support the specific quality of service,
lifetime, and maintainability requirements.
Some of the mechanisms that will form typical parts of WSNs are:

Multihop wireless communication

 While wireless communication will be a core technique, a direct communication

between a sender and a receiver is faced with limitations.
 In particular, communication over long distances is only possible using prohibitively
high transmission power.
 The use of intermediate nodes as relays can reduce the total required power.
 Hence, for many forms of WSNs, so-called multihop communication will be a
necessary ingredient.

Energy-efficient operation

 Both for communication and computation, sensing, actuating .

 To support long lifetimes, energy-efficient operation is a key technique.
 Options to look into include energy-efficient data transport between two nodes
(measured in J/bit) or, more importantly, the energy-efficient determination of
requested information.
 Also, non-homogeneous energy consumption – the forming of “hotspots” – is an
issue.

Auto-configuration

 Manual Configuration just not an option.

 A WSN will have to configure most of its operational parameters autonomously,
independent of external configuration – the sheer number of nodes and simplified
deployment will require that capability in most applications.
 Nodes should be able to determine their geographical positions only using other
nodes of the network – so called “self-location”.
 The network should be able to tolerate failing nodes (because of a depleted
battery, for example) or to integrate new nodes (because of incremental
deployment after failure, for example).

Collaboration and in-network processing

 In some applications, a single sensor is not able to decide whether an event has
happened but several sensors have to collaborate to detect an event and only the
joint data of many sensors provides enough information.
 Information is processed in the network itself in various forms to achieve this
collaboration, as opposed to having every node transmit all data to an external
network and process it “at the edge” of the network.
 An example is to determine the highest or the average temperature within an area
and to report that value to a sink.
 To solve such tasks efficiently, readings from individual sensors can be aggregated
as they propagate through the network, reducing the amount of data to be
transmitted and hence improving the energy efficiency.
 Nodes in the network collaborate towards a joint goal
 Pre-processing data in network (as opposed to at the edge) can greatly improve
efficiency

Data centric

 Focusing network design on data, not on node identifies(id-centric networking)

 To improve efficiency
 Traditional communication networks are typically centered around the transfer of
data between two specific devices, each equipped with (at least) one network
address – the operation of such networks is thus address-centric.
 In a WSN, where nodes are typically deployed redundantly to protect against node
failures or to compensate for the low quality of a single node’s actual sensing
equipment, the identity of the particular node supplying data becomes irrelevant.
 Hence, switching from an address-centric paradigm to a data-centric paradigm in
designing architecture and communication protocols is promising.
 An example for such a data-centric interaction would be to request the average
temperature in a given location area, as opposed to requiring temperature readings
from individual nodes.
 Such a data-centric paradigm can also be used to set conditions for alerts or events
 In this sense, the data-centric approach is closely related to query concepts known
from databases; it also combines well with collaboration, in-network processing,
and aggregation.
 Focusing network design on data, not on node identifies(id-centric networking)
 To improve efficiency

Locality

 Rather a design guideline than a proper mechanism, the principle of locality will
have to be embraced extensively to ensure, in particular, scalability.
 Nodes, which are very limited in resources like memory, should attempt to limit the
state that they accumulate during protocol processing to only information about
their direct neighbors.
 The hope is that this will allow the network to scale to large numbers of nodes
without having to rely on powerful processing at each single node.
 How to combine the locality principle with efficient protocol designs is still an open
research topic, however.

Exploit trade-offs

 Similar to the locality principle, WSNs will have to rely to a large degree on
exploiting various inherent trade-offs between mutually contradictory goals, both
during system/protocol design and at runtime.
 Examples for such trade-offs have been mentioned already:
1. higher energy expenditure allows higher result accuracy, or
2. A longer lifetime of the entire network trades off against lifetime of
individual nodes.
 Another important trade-off is node density: depending on application,
deployment, and node failures at runtime, the density of the network can change
considerably – the protocols will have to handle very different situations, possibly
present at different places of a single network.
 Harnessing these mechanisms such that they are easy to use, yet sufficiently
general, for an application programmer is a major challenge.
 Departing from an address-centric view of the network requires new programming
interfaces that go beyond the simple semantics of the conventional socket interface
and allow concepts like required accuracy, energy/accuracy trade-offs, or scoping.

Why are sensor networks different?

Two close relatives

 Mobile ad hoc networks and wireless sensor Networks
 Fieldbuses and wireless sensor networks

Comparison Mobile ad hoc networks and wireless sensor networks

What is mobile adhoc network?

 Network that is setup, for a specific purpose, to meet a quickly appearing

communication need
 Example: laptops in a meeting room
 Self-configuration is crucial – the network is expected to work without manual
management or configuration.
 E.g. disaster relief operations -- fire fighters communicate with each other – or
networks in difficult locations like large construction sites
 Large constructions sites

The two basic challenges in a MANET are

The reorganization of the network as nodes move about and handling the problems of
the limited reach of wireless communication. Literature on MANETs that summarize
these problems and their solutions abound, as these networks are still a very active field
of research; popular books include.
These general problems are shared between MANETs and WSNs. Nonetheless, there are
some principal differences between the two concepts, warranting a distinction between
them and regarding separate research efforts for each one.

Applications and equipment

 MANETs are associated with somewhat different applications as well as different user
equipment than WSNs.
 In a MANET, the terminal can be fairly powerful (a laptop or a PDA) with a
comparably large battery. This equipment is needed because in the typical MANET
applications, there is usually a human in the loop.
 The MANET is used for voice communication between two distant peers, or it is used
for access to a remote infrastructure like a Web server. Therefore, the equipment has
to be powerful enough to support these applications.

Application specific

 Owing to the large number of conceivable combinations of sensing, computing, and

communication technology, many different application scenarios for WSNs become
possible.
 It is unlikely that there will be a “one-size-fits-all” solution for all these potentially
very different possibilities.
 As one example, WSNs are conceivable with very different network densities, from
very sparse to very dense deployments, which will require different or at least
adaptive protocols.
 This diversity, although present, is not quite as large in MANETs.

Environment interaction
 WSNs have to interact with the environment, their traffic characteristics can be
expected to be very different from other, human-driven forms of networks.
 WSNs are likely to exhibit very low data rates over a large timescale, but can have
very bursty traffic when something happens (a phenomenon known from real-time
systems as event showers or alarm storms).
 Long periods (months) of inactivity can alternate with short periods (seconds or
minutes) of very high activity in the network, pushing its capacity to the limits.
 MANETs, on the other hand, are used to support more conventional applications
(Web, voice, and so on) with their comparably well understood traffic
characteristics.

Scale

 Potentially, WSNs have to scale to much larger numbers (thousands or perhaps

hundreds of thousands) of entities than current ad hoc networks, requiring
different, more scalable solutions.
 As a concrete case in point, endowing sensor nodes with a unique identifier is costly
(either at production or at runtime) and might be an overhead that could be
avoided – hence, protocols that work without such identifiers might become
important in WSNs, whereas it is fair to assume such identifiers to exist in MANET
nodes.

Energy

 In both WSNs and MANETs, energy is a scare resource.

 But WSNs have tighter requirements on network lifetime, and recharging or
replacing WSN node batteries is much less an option than in MANETs.
 The impact of energy considerations on the entire system architecture is much
deeper in WSNs than in MANETs.

Self-configurability

 Similar to ad hoc networks, WSNs will most likely be required to self-configure into
connected networks, but the difference in traffic, energy trade-offs, and so forth,
could require new solutions.
 Nevertheless, it is in this respect that MANETs and WSNs are probably most similar.

Dependability and QoS

 The requirements regarding dependability and QoS are quite different. In a MANET,
each individual node should be fairly reliable; in a WSN, an individual node is next to
irrelevant.
 The quality of service issues in a MANET are dictated by traditional applications (low
jitter for voice applications, for example); for WSNs, entirely new QoS concepts are
required, which also take energy explicitly into account.

Data centric

 Redundant deployment will make data-centric protocols attractive in WSNs. This

concept is alien to MANETs.
 Unless applications like file sharing are used in MANETs, which do bear some
resemblance to data centric approaches, data-centric protocols are irrelevant to
MANETs – but these applications do not represent the typically envisioned use case.

Simplicity and resource scarceness

 Sensor nodes are simple and energy supply is scarce, the operating and networking
software must be kept orders of magnitude simpler compared to today’s desktop
computers.
 This simplicity may also require breaking with conventional layering rules for
networking software, since layering abstractions typically cost time and space.
 Also, Resources like memory, which is relevant for comparably heavy-weight routing
protocols as those used in MANETs, is not available in arbitrary quantities, requiring
new, scalable, resource-efficient solutions.

Mobility

The mobility problem in MANETs is caused by nodes moving around, changing multihop
routes in the network that have to be handled. In a WSN, this problem can also exist if
the sensor nodes are mobile in the given application.

There are two additional aspects of mobility to be considered in WSNs.

First, the sensor network can be used to detect and observe a physical phenomenon (in
the intrusion detection applications, for example). This phenomenon is the cause of
events that happen in the network (like raising of alarms) and can also cause some local
processing, for example, determining whether there really is an intruder.

What happens if this phenomenon moves about?

Ideally, data that has been gathered at one place should be available at the next one.
Also, in tracking applications, it is the explicit task of the network to ensure that some
form of activity happens in nodes that surround the phenomenon under observation.

Second, the sinks of information in the network (nodes where information should be
delivered to) can be mobile as well. In principle, this is no different than node mobility in
the general MANET sense, but can cause some difficulties for protocols that operate
efficiently in fully static scenarios. Here, carefully observing trade-offs is necessary.

Both MANET and WSNs, mobility can be correlated – a group of nodes moving in a
related, similar fashion. This correlation can be caused in a MANET by, for example,
belonging to a group of people traveling together. In a WSN, the movement of nodes
can be correlated because nodes are jointly carried by a storm, a river, or some other
fluid.

Conclusion/Summary

WSNs have to support very different applications, that they have to interact with the
physical environment and that they have to carefully adjudicate various trade-offs
justifies considering WSNs as a system concept distinct from MANETs

ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES FOR WSNs

 Miniaturization of hardware
 Reduced chip size and improved energy efficiency is accompanied by reduced
cost(For wireless communication, simple microcontroller, sensing, batteries)
 Sensor node is accompanied with device for energy scavenging, recharging the
battery with energy gathered from the environment Counterpart for hardware is
software
 To design appropriate communication protocols

Building such wireless sensor networks has only become possible with some
fundamental advances in enabling technologies. First and foremost among these
technologies is the miniaturization of hardware. Smaller feature sizes in chips have
driven down the power consumption of the basic components of a sensor node to a
level that the constructions of WSNs can be contemplated. This is particularly relevant
to microcontrollers and memory chips as such, but also, the radio modems, responsible
for wireless communication, have become much more energy efficient.
Reduced chip size and improved energy efficiency is accompanied by reduced
cost, which is necessary to make redundant deployment of nodes affordable.
Next to processing and communication, the actual sensing equipment is the third
relevant technology. Here, however, it is difficult to generalize because of the vast range
of possible sensors

These three basic parts of a sensor node have to accompanied by power supply. This
requires, depending on application, high capacity batteries that last for long times, that
is, have only a negligible self-discharge rate, and that can efficiently provide small
amounts of current. Ideally, a sensor node also has a device for Energy Scavenging,
recharging the battery with energy gathered from the environment – solar cells or
vibration-based power generation are conceivable options.
Such a concept requires the battery to be efficiently chargeable with small amounts of
current, which is not a standard ability. Both batteries and energy scavenging are still
objects of ongoing research.
The counterpart to the basic hardware technologies is software. The first question to
answer here is the principal division of tasks and functionalities in a single node – the
architecture of the operating system or runtime environment. This environment has to
support simple retasking, cross-layer information exchange, and modularity to allow for
simple maintenance. This software architecture on a single node has to be extended to a
network architecture, where the division of tasks between nodes, not only on a single
node, becomes the relevant question – for example, how to structure interfaces for
application programmers. The third part to solve then is the question of how to design
appropriate communication protocols.