Wireless Networks

, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp 117–130 | Cite as

An efficient multi-path pipeline transmission for a bulk data transfer in IEEE 802.15.4 multi-hop networks

  • Dohoo PyeonEmail author
  • Hyunsoo Yoon


A pipeline transmission is the state-of-the-art approach to transmit large amounts of data over IEEE 802.15.4 multi-hop networks, but the performance of the pipeline transmission can be degraded in unreliable networks. In this paper, we propose an efficient multi-path pipeline transmission (EMP) to support the large data transfer with low latency and high energy efficiency under various network conditions. The proposed EMP adjusts cycle time of the pipeline transmission, which allows nodes to retransmit dropped data packet efficiently. It helps to improve the transmission probability, so EMP can mitigate additional delay and energy consumption caused by frequent end-to-end retransmissions. In addition, EMP employs a multi-path transmission which distributes the large data transfer over multiple routes. It contributes not only to reduce transmission time but also to balance energy consumption of nodes. In this work, we evaluate the performance of EMP through theoretical and simulation-based analysis and compare the performance with other existing pipelines. The results show that EMP outperforms the existing protocols in terms of transmission time and energy efficiency, and then the improved performance of EMP can be maintained regardless of network environments such as link quality, hop counts, and network density.


IEEE 802.15.4 networks Multi-hop communications Bulk data transfer Pipeline transmissions Multi-path transmissions 



This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIP) (No. 2017R1A2B4006026).


  1. 1.
    Ruzzelli, A. G., Jurdak, R., OHare, G. M., & Stok, P. V. D. (2007). Energy-efficient multi-hop medical sensor networking. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGMOBILE International Workshop on Systems and Networking Support for Healthcare and Assisted Living Environments (HealthNet) (pp. 37–42).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mehta, A. M. & Pister, K. S. J. (2011). Frequency offset compensation for crystal-free 802.15.4 communication. In Proceedings of International Conference on Advanced Technologies for Communications (ACT) (pp. 45–47).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee, T., Lee, M., Kim, H., & Bahk, S. (2016). A synergistic architecture for RPL over BLE. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Sensing, Communication and Networking (SECON) (pp. 1–9).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dong, P. (2013). Assessment of link quality in 2.45GHz high-density IEEE 802.15.4 wireless networks. In Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Signal Processing and Communication Systems (ISPACS) (pp. 481–486).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Werner-Allen, G., Lorincz, K., Welsh, M., Marcillo, O., Johnson, J., Ruiz, M., et al. (2006). Deploying a wireless sensor network on an active volcano. IEEE Internet Computing, 10(2), 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Werner-Allen, G., Lorincz, K., Johnson, J., Lees, J., & Welsh, M. (2006). Fidelity and yield in a volcano monitoring sensor network. In Proceeding of the 7th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI) (pp. 381–396).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim, S., Pakzad, S., Culler, D., Demmel, J., Fenves, G., Glaser, S., & Turon, M. (2007). Health monitoring of civil infrastructures using wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN) (pp. 254–263).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chebrolu, K., Raman, B., & Mishra, N. (2008). BriMon: a sensor network system for railway bridge monitoring. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services (MobiSys) (pp. 2–14).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rahimi, M., Baer, R., Iroezi, O. I., Garcia, J. C., Warrior, J., Estrin, D., & Srivastava, M. (2005). Cyclops: in situ image sensing and interpretation in wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys) (pp. 192–204).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pham, C., & Cousin, P. (2013). Streaming the sound of smart cities: experimentations on the smartsantander test-bed. In Proceedings of the 2013 Green Computing and Communications (GreenCom), and the IEEE International Conference on Internet of Things/Cyber, Physical and Social Computing (iThings/CPSCom) (pp. 611–618).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aazam, M., Khan, I., Alsaffer, A. A., & Huh, E. (2014). Cloud of things: integrating internet of things and cloud computing and the issues involved. In Proceedings of the 11th International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences and Technology (IBCAST) (pp. 414–419).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gabale, V., Chebrolu, K., Raman, B., & Bijwe, S. (2012). PIP: A multichannel. TDMA-based MAC for efficient and scalable bulk transfer in sensor networks. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks, 8(4), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Doddavenkatappa, M., & Choon, M. (2014). \(\text{P}^{3}\): a practical packet pipeline using synchronous transmissions for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN) (pp. 203–214).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Österlind, F., & Dunkels, A. (2008). Approaching the maximum 802.15.4 multi-hop throughput. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM Workshop on Embedded Networked Sensors (HotEmNet).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim, S., Fonseca, R., Dutta, P., Tavakoli, P., Culler, D., Levis, P., Shenker, S., & Stoica, I. (2007). Flush: a reliable bulk transport protocol for multihop wireless networks”, In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys) (pp. 351–365).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ekbatanifard, G., Sommer, P., Kusy, B., Iyer, V., & Langendoen, K. (2013). FastForward: high-throughput dual-radio streaming. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Mobile Ad-hoc and Sensor Systems (MASS) (pp. 209–213).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Varshney, A., Mottola, L., Carlsson, M., & Voigt, T. (2015). Directional transmissions and receptions for high-throughput bulk forwarding in wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys) (pp. 351–364).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Duquennosy S., Österlind, F., & Dunkels, A. (2011). Lossy links, low power, high throughput. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys) (pp. 12–25).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lim, Y., Kim, H., & Kang, S. (2010). A design of wireless sensor networks for a power quality monitoring system. Sensors, 10(11), 9712–9725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Incel, O. D. (2011). A survey on multi-channel communication in wireless sensor networks. Computer Networks, 55(13), 3081–3099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ferrari, F., Zimmerling, M., Thiele, L., & Saukh, O. (2011). Efficient network flooding and time synchronization with glossy. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN) (pp. 73–84).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yi, J., Adnane, A., David, S., & Parrein, B. (2011). Multipath optimized link state routing for mobile ad hoc networks. Ad Hoc Networks, 9(1), 28–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Radi, M., Dezfouli, B., Bakar, K. A., Razak, S. A., & Nematbakhsh, M. A. (2011). Interference-aware multipath routing protocol for QoS improvement in event-driven wireless sensor networks. Tsinghua Science & Technology, 16(5), 475–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Teo, J., Ha, Y., & Tham, C. (2008). Interference-minimized multi-path routing with congestion control in wireless sensor networks for high-rate streaming. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 7(9), 1124–1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tang, L., Wang, K., Huang, Y., & Gu, F. (2007). Channel characterization and link quality assessment of IEEE 802.15.4-compliant radio for factory environments. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 3(2), 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chehri, A., & Mouftah, H. (2012). An empirical link-quality analysis for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC) (pp. 164–169).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Entezami, F., Tunnicliffe, M., & Politis, C. (2014). Find the weakest link: Statistical analysis on wireless sensor network link-quality metrics. IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, 9(3), 28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
  29. 29.
    Xiangning, F., & Yulin, S. (2007). Improvement on LEACH protocol of wireless sensor network. In Proceedings of International Conference on Sensor Technologies and Applications (SensorComm) (pp. 260–264).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceKorea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyDaejeonKorea

Personalised recommendations