1 / 15

Practical Issues in Underwater Networks

Practical Issues in Underwater Networks. Jim Partan, Jim Kurose, Brian Levine University of Massachusetts Amherst. Supported by ONR contract N00014-05-G-0106-0008 via subcontract from WHOI, and NSF award CNS-0519881. introduction.

malloren
Download Presentation

Practical Issues in Underwater Networks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Practical Issues in Underwater Networks Jim Partan, Jim Kurose, Brian Levine University of Massachusetts Amherst Supported by ONR contract N00014-05-G-0106-0008 via subcontract from WHOI, and NSF award CNS-0519881.

  2. introduction My Goal: Highlight differences between terrestrial radio sensor networks and underwater acoustic sensor networks, with network design implications. Different emphasis from recent surveys: • Physical channel (already discussed) • Environment → different regimes • Different energy model → different metrics Questions and comments welcome anytime!

  3. sensor costs… • Some very common, off-the-shelf oceanographic sensors: Conductivity, Temperature, and Depth (CTD): $3k-$12k Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP): $25k Seismometer: $10k

  4. → network sparsity • Sensors are expensive, so even if acoustic modems were free, sensor nodes will be expensive. • Oceanographic survey volumes can be large (though sampling is non-uniform). • Many (but not all) underwater networks will be sparse for a long time to come.

  5. deployment costs… • Deployment and Recovery are often the largest expenses: Deep Ocean Ship: $25k/day Regional Ship: $12k/day Remotely-Operated Vehicle: ~$10k/day + ship Coastal Boat: $3k-5k/day

  6. → high mobility • Deployment costs and node sparsity → Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs). • ~$2k/day for coastal deployment and recovery; autonomous operation. • $80k - $250k+ for typical ocean-going AUV (including some sensors).

  7. enduring? Economic arguments rather than physical. Is there a fundamental basis for costs & sparsity? • Harsh, remote environment. • Ocean is huge, even with non-uniform sampling. • Deeply embedded systems. • Small market, and demanding customers. • New technologies. Cost/energy tradeoff? Some fundamental reasons, and change may be slow. → Sparsity and mobility will be enduring features of many underwater networks.

  8. counter-example Good application for a traditional dense, fixed-node sensor network; likely to make sense economically: Seismic Monitoring of Existing Oilfields: (Heidemann et al) • Current method (seismic airgun surveys) is expensive, and hence is rarely done. • Frequent monitoring of oilfields is valuable. • Seismometers require fixed nodes. → No single type of underwater network.

  9. network regimes Area covered # Nodes

  10. network regimes Area covered Dense region: A MAC issue is Navigation QoS. # Nodes

  11. network regimes Unpartitioned Multi-Hop region: MAC issues are throughput, energy, delay. Area covered Dense region: A MAC issue is Navigation QoS. # Nodes

  12. network regimes DTN region: MAC issue is long-term average fairness. Unpartitioned Multi-Hop region: MAC issues are throughput, energy, delay. Area covered Dense region: A MAC issue is Navigation QoS. # Nodes

  13. energy • Sensor networks often optimized to minimize energy. • Here, transmit energy dominates receive energy One example (WHOI Micromodem): • 80mW detection • 80mW – 2W receive (80bps – 5kbps) • 10W-50W transmit (~2km @ 25kHz) • as low as 1W transmit (~500m @ 25kHz) →Transmit energy is the important metric

  14. energy • Propulsion energy can dominate communication energy REMUS: 1.0-2.9 m/s, 5-20 hours Hotel load: ~30W Propulsion: 15-110W Network energy negligible. Webb Research glider (electric): 0.2-0.4 m/s, ~1 month Hotel + Propulsion: ~2W Energy is important metric.

  15. conclusions & questions? • Sparsity and mobility will be enduring features of many underwater networks: • New operating regimes and metrics for MAC, e.g. long-term fairness. • Protocol adaptation between dense and sparse areas. • Different energy costs: • Transmit energy dominates receive energy. • In many mobile networks, communication energy is negligible: • Optimize for new metrics, such as reliability metrics.

More Related