Impact of Variable Packet Length on the Performance of Heterogeneous Multimedia Wireless Sensor Networks

  • Suniti DuttEmail author
  • Sunil Agrawal
  • Renu Vig


Performance valuation of wireless sensor network (WSN) routing protocols calls for realistic data traffic models because of their application specific nature. Since energy limitations is a cardinal issue for WSNs, network lifetime has become a key performance metric. In the quest towards energy efficiency, data packet length is an essential factor, especially in the multimedia applications. On one hand, a modest packet length brings down the packet loss, nonetheless, it results in dissipation of more energy. Thus, there comes forth a tradeoff in resolving the data packet length, where both low and high bit rates lead to certain energy inefficiency problems. This paper analyses the effect of variable packet length, being majorly ignored by routing protocols, on the network lifetime, throughput and reliability. The presented work is validated using computer simulations.


Clustering Heterogeneous environment Lifetime Multimedia Reliability Throughput Variable bit rate Wireless sensor networks 



  1. 1.
    Yang, G. Z. (2018). Implantable sensors and systems: From theory to practice. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shakeel, P. M., Baskar, S., Dhulipala, V. R. S., Mishra, S., & Jaber, M. M. (2018). Maintaining security and privacy in healthcare system using learning based deep-Q-networks. Journal of Medical Systems, 42, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mainwaring, A., Culler, D., Polastre, J., Szewczyk, R., & Anderson, J. (2002). Wireless sensor networks for habitat monitoring. In Proceeding of the ACM international workshop on wireless sensor networks and applications.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Szewczyk, R., Osterweil, E., Polastre, J., Hamilton, M., Mainwaring, A., & Estrin, D. (2004). Habitat monitoring with sensor networks. Communications of the ACM—Wireless Sensor Networks, 47, 34–40.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Darabkh, K. A., Albtoush, W. Y., & Jafar, I. F. (2017). Improved clustering algorithms for target tracking in wireless sensor networks. The Journal of Supercomputing, 73, 1952–1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cao, Q., Yan, T., Stankovic, J., & Abdelzaher, T. (2005). Analysis of target detection performance for wireless sensor networks. Chapter—Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems, Series-Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3650, 276–292.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bokareva, T., Hu, W., Kanhere, S., Ristic, B., Gordon, N., Bessell, T., Rutten, M., & Jha, S. (2006). Wireless sensor networks for battlefield surveillance. In Proceeding of the land warfare conference.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gupta, S., Verma, H. K., & Sangal, A. L. (2014). Efficient security mechanism to counter the attacks in wireless sensor networks. CSI Transactions on ICT, 2, 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sathya, D., & Krishneswari, K. (2016). Cross-layer intrusion detection system for wireless sensor networks. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, 75, 213–220.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wenjie, C., Lifeng, C., Zhanglong, C., & Shiliang, T. (2005). A realtime dynamic traffic control system based on wireless sensor network. In Proceeding of the IEEE international conference on parallel processing workshops.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gomez, C., & Paradells, J. (2010). Wireless home automation networks: A survey of architectures and technologies. IEEE Communications, 48, 92–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wheeler, A. (2007). Commercial applications of wireless sensor networks using ZigBee. IEEE Communications, 45, 70–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heinzelman, W., Chandrakasan, A., & Balakrishnan, H. (2000). Energy efficient communication protocol for wireless microsensor networks. In Proceeding of the IEEE international conference on system sciences. Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yarvis, M., Kushalnagar, N., & Singh, H. (2005). Exploiting heterogeneity in sensor networks. In Proceeding of the annual joint conference of the IEEE computer and communications societies (INFOCOM). Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smaragdakis, G., Matta, I., & Bestavros, A. (2004). SEP: A stable election protocol for clustered heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the international workshop on sensor and actor network protocols and applications (SANPA). Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Qing, L., Zhu, Q., & Wang, M. (2006). Design of a distributed energy-efficient clustering algorithm for heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. Computer Communications, 29, 2230–2237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kumar, S., Verma, S. K., & Kumar, A. (2015). Enhanced threshold sensitive stable election protocol for heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. Wireless Personal Communications, 85, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hou, Y. T., & Shi, Y. (2007). Variable bit rate flow routing in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 6, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Demirkol, I., Alagoz, F., Delic, H., & Ersoy, C. (2006). Wireless sensor networks for intrusion detection: Packet traffic modelling. IEEE Communication Letters, 10, 22–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sankarasubramaniam, Y., Akyildiz, I. F., & McLaughlin, S. W. (2003). Energy efficiency based packet size optimization in wireless sensor networks. In Processing IEEE international workshop on sensor network protocols and applications. Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ghazaleh, N., Lanigan, P., Gobriel, S., Mosse, D., & Melhem, R. (2005). Dynamic rate selection for extending the lifetime of energy-constrained networks. In Proceeding of the IEEE international conference on performance, computing and communications. Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dutt, S., Agrawal, S., & Vig, R. (2018). Cluster-head restricted energy efficient protocol (CREEP) for routing in heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. Wireless Personal Communications, 100, 1477–1497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ray, N. K., & Turuk, A. K. (2016). Handbook of research on advanced wireless sensor network applications, protocols, and architectures. New York: IGI Global Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mahmood, M. A., Seah, W., & Welch, I. (2015). Reliability in wireless sensor networks: A survey and challenges ahead. Computer Networks, 79, 166–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dâmaso, A., Rosa, N., & Maciel, P. (2014). Reliability of wireless sensor networks. Sensors, 14, 15760–15785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University Institute of Engineering and TechnologyPanjab UniversityChandigarhIndia

Personalised recommendations