Tutorial: Wireless Sensor Networks
Tutorial: Wireless Sensor Networks
.
General Overview
2
Motivation
GOAL: Deeply Networked Systems or Pervasive
Networking
98% of all processors are not in traditional desktop
computer systems, but in house-hold appliances,
vehicles, and machines on factory floors
Add reliable wireless communications and sensing
functions to the billions of physically embedded
computing devices to support ubiquitous networked
computing
Distributed Wireless Sensor Networks is a collection
of embedded sensor devices with networking
capabilities
3
Introduction to WSN
4
Background , contd.
Sensors
Enabled by recent
advances in MEMS
Battery CPU
technology
Integrated Wireless
Transceiver
Wireless
Transceiver Limited in
Energy
Memory
Computation
Storage
Transmission range
Sensing Hardware
Bandwidth
5
Background, contd.
6
Sensor Nodes, contd.
7
Sensors (contd.)
The overall architecture of a sensor
node consists of:
The sensor node processing
subsystem running on sensor
node main CPU
The sensor subsystem and
The communication subsystem
The processor and radio board
includes:
TI MSP430 microcontroller with
10kB RAM
16-bit RISC with 48K Program
Flash
Crossbow Mote
IEEE 802.15.4 compliant radio
at 250 Mbps TPR2400CA-TelosB
1MB external data flash
Runs TinyOS 1.1.10 or higher
Two AA batteries or USB
1.8 mA (active); 5.1uA (sleep)
8
Overall Architecture of a sensor node
Application Layer Sensor
Communication
SubSystem Sensor Node CPU
Network Layer
MAC Layer
Physical Layer Radio Board
9
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN)
Distributed collection of networked sensors
10
Networked vs. individual sensors
Extended range of sensing:
Cover a wider area of operation
Redundancy:
Multiple nodes close to each other increase fault
tolerance
Improved accuracy:
Sensor nodes collaborate and combine their data
to increase the accuracy of sensed data
Extended functionality:
Sensor nodes can not only perform sensing
functionality, but also provide forwarding service.
11
Applications of sensor networks
Physical security for military operations
Indoor/Outdoor Environmental monitoring
Seismic and structural monitoring
Industrial automation
Bio-medical applications
Health and Wellness Monitoring
Inventory Location Awareness
Future consumer applications, including smart
homes.
12
Applications, contd.
cooperative
processing
cooperative
SENSING signalling
THREAT
ALERT
ALERT THREAT
MULTI-HOP
COMMUNICATION
Beam Formation
COMMAND LEVEL
13
Applications, contd.
14
Characteristics and challenges
Deeply distributed architecture: localized coordination to
reach entire system goals, no infrastructure with no central
control support
Autonomous operation: self-organization, self-configuration,
adaptation, exception-free
TCP/IP is open, widely implemented, supports multiple
physical network, relatively efficient and light weight, but
requires manual intervention to configure and to use.
Energy conservation: physical, MAC, link, route, application
Scalability: scale with node density, number and kinds of
networks
Data centric network: address free route, named data,
reinforcement-based adaptation, in-network data aggregation
15
Challenges, contd.
Challenges
Limited battery power
Limited storage and computation
Lower bandwidth and high error rates
Scalability to 1000s of nodes
Network Protocol Design Goals
Operate in self-configured mode (no infrastructure
network support)
Limit memory footprint of protocols
Limit computation needs of protocols -> simple,
yet efficient protocols
Conserve battery power in all ways possible
16
WSN vs. MANET
Wireless sensor networks may be considered a
subset of Mobile Ad-hoc NETworks (MANET).
WSN nodes have less power, computation and
communication compared to MANET nodes.
MANETs have high degree of mobility, while sensor
networks are mostly stationary.
Freq. node failures in WSN -> topology changes
17
Why not port Ad Hoc Protocols?
Ad Hoc networks require significant amount of
routing data storage and computation
Sensor nodes are limited in memory and CPU
18
Focus: Radio Transceiver Usage
The wireless radio transceiver is typically in three modes:
Transmit – Maximum power consumption
Receive
Idle
19
Rockwell Node (SA-1100 proc)
MCU Mode Sensor Mode Radio Mode Power(mW)
Active On Tx(36.3mW) 1080.5
Tx(13.8mW) 942.6
Tx(0.30mW) 773.9
Active On Rx 751.6
Active On Idle 727.5
Active On Sleep 416.3
Active On Removed 383.3
Active Removed Removed 360.0
Sleep On Removed 64.0
20
UCLA Medusa node (ATMEL CPU)
MCU Mode Sensor Radio(mW) Data rate Power(mW)
Active On Tx(0.74,OOK) 2.4Kbps 24.58
Tx(0.74,OOK) 19.2Kbps 25.37
Tx(0.10,OOK) 2.4Kbps 19.24
Tx(0.74,OOK) 19.2Kbps 20.05
Tx(0.74,ASK) 19.2Kbps 27.46
Tx(0.10,ASK) 2.4Kbps 21.26
Active On Rx - 22.20
Active On Idle - 22.06
Active On Off - 9.72
Idle On Off - 5.92
Sleep Off Off - 0.02
21
Energy conservation
• Low power circuit(CMOS, ASIC) design
Physical layer • Optimum hardware/software function division
• Energy effective waveform/code design
• Adaptive RF power control
See Jones, Sivalingam, Agrawal, and Chen survey article in ACM WINET, July 2001;
See Lindsey, Sivalingam, and Raghavendra book chapter in Wiley Handbook of Mobile Computing,
Ivan Stojmenovic, Editor, 2002.
22
Network Architectures
23
Network Architectures
Layered Clustered
Architecture Architecture
Base
Base Statio
Statio n
n
Layer 1
Layer 2
Layer 3
24
Clustered network architecture
Sensor nodes autonomously form a group called clusters.
The clustering process is applied recursively to form a hierarchy of clusters.
Tier 2
Tier 1
Tier 1
Tier 0
Tier 0
25
Cluster architecture (contd.)
Example - LEACH protocol
It uses two-tier hierarchy
Base Station clustering architecture.
It uses distributed
(( )) algorithm to organize the
Cluster-head
sensor nodes into
(( )) clusters.
(( ) ) (( ))
Cluster-head The cluster-head nodes
(( ) ) Cluster create TDMA schedules.
(( ) )
Cluster-head
(( )) Nodes transmit data
(( ) ) (( ) ) during their assigned
Cluster slots.
(( )) Cluster The energy efficiency of
Sensor the LEACH is mainly due
to data fusion.
26
Layered Network Architecture
A few hundred sensor nodes
(half/full duplex)
A single powerful base-station
Network nodes are organized
into concentric Layers
Layer: Set of nodes that have
the same hop-count to the
base-station
Additional Mobile Nodes
traversing the network
Wireless Multi-Hop
Infrastructure Network
Architecture (MINA)
A 10 node sensor network depicting cluster of node 3;
there are 2 mobile nodes
27
MINA, contd.
28
Data Dissemination Architectures
and Protocols
29
Data Dissemination
In ad hoc networks, traffic is peer-to-peer
Multi-hop routing is used to communicate data
In WSN, other traffic models are possible:
Data Collection Model
Data Diffusion Model
Data Collection Model: Source sends data to a collection
entity (e.g. gateway): periodically or on-demand
Data Diffusion Model:
Source: A sensor node that generates data, based on its
sensing mechanisms’ observations
Event: Something that needs to be reported, e.g. in target
detection; some abnormal activity
Sink: A node, randomly located in the field, that is
interested in events and seeks such information
30
Data Diffusion: Concept
Sink 1
Sources
Sink 2
32
Diffusion: Basics
Data-centric vs. address centric architecture
Individual network address is not critical; Data is important
and is accessed as needed
User can pose a specific task, that could be executed by
sensor nodes
Concept of Named Data: (Attribute, Value) Pair
Sink node requests data by sending “interests” for data
Interests are propagated through the network, setting up
gradients in the network, designed to “draw” data
Data matching the interest is then transmitted towards the
sink, over multiple paths (obtained by the gradients
The sink can then reinforce some of these paths to optimize
33
Diffusion Basics, contd.
Design Issues:
How does a sink express its interest in one or
more events?
How do sensor nodes keep track of existing
interests from multiple sinks?
When an event occurs, how does data get
propagated from source(s) to sink(s)?
Can in-network data processing (e.g. data fusion),
data aggregation and data caching help improve
performance?
[Intanagonwiwat et. al.; ACM MobiCom 2000]
34
Diffusion Basics, contd
Example Task
{Type = Animal; Interval = 20ms; Time = 10s;
Region = [-100, 100, 200, 400] }
The above task instructs a sensor node in the
specified region to track for animals; If animal is
tracked/detected, then send observations every 20
ms for 10s
The above task is sent via interest messages and all
sensor nodes register this task.
When a node detects an event, it then constructs a
Data Event message
35
Diffusion: Basics, contd
Data Event Example:
{Type = Animal; Instance = Tiger;
Location = [101, 201]; Intensity = 0.4;
Confidence = 0.8; Timestamp = 2:51:00}
Interests and Gradients:
For each active task that a sink is interested in:
Sink broadcasts interest to its neighbors
Initially, to explore, it could set large interval (e.g 1s)
Sinkrefreshes each interest, using timestamps
Each sensor node maintains an interest cache
Interest aggregation is possible
36
Diffusion: Interests
When a node receives an interest, it:
Checks cache to see if an entry is present.
Sources
Sink 2
38
Diffusion: Data Propagation
When a sensor node detects a target, it:
Searches interest cache for matching entry
41
Problem Definition
Objective: Transmit sensed data from each sensor node to a base station
One round = BS collecting data from all nodes
Sensor Nodes
Base station
42
Energy*Delay metric
Why energy * delay metric?
Find optimal balance to gather data quickly but in
an energy efficient manner
Energy = Energy consumed per round
43
Direct Transmission
Direct Transmission
All nodes transmit to the base station (BS)
Very expensive since BS may be located very far
away and nodes need more energy to transmit
over longer distances
Farther the distance, greater the propagation losses,
and hence higher the transmission power
All nodes must take turns transmitting to the BS
so delay is high (N units for a N-node network)
Better scheme is to have fewer nodes transmit
this far distance to lower energy costs and more
simultaneous transmissions to lower delay
44
LEACH
Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy
Two-level hierarchy
Base
Station
45
Scheme #1: PEGASIS
Goalsof PEGASIS (Power-Efficient GAthering for
Sensor Information Systems)
Minimize distance nodes must transmit
46
PEGASIS
Greedy Chain Algorithm
Start with node furthest away from BS
47
PEGASIS
End
Start
48
Scheme #2: Binary Scheme
Chain-based as described in PEGASIS
At each level node only transmits to another node
All nodes receiving at any level rise to the next level
Delay: O(log2 N)
Step 4: c3 BS
Step 3: c3 c7
Step 2: c1 c3 c5 c7
Step 1: c0c1 c2c3 c4c5 c6c7
50
Scheme # 3:Chain-based 3 level
For non-CDMA sensor nodes, binary scheme is not
logical
Construct chain as described in PEGASIS
Divide chain into 10 groups (for the 100-node)
To space out simultaneous transmissions to
minimize interference
In each group, nodes will transmit one at a time
Finally, one node out of each group at each level will
contain all the data and will rise to the next level until
finally the leader will transmit to the BS
Total delay = 15 units (9+4+1+1) for 100-nodes
51
Chain-based 3 level scheme
ThirdLevel
Two nodes rise to top and non-leader transmits to
leader
Leader transmits to BS
c18 BS
c18c68
c8 c18c28c38c48 c58 c68 c78 c88c98
c0c1c2…c7c8c9 c10c11…c18c19 …c90 c91…c98 c99
52
MAC Protocols for WSN
53
MAC Protocols
What is fundamentally different for MAC Protocol
design in WSN?
Low-power operation is even more critical
Reduced coordination and synchronization is
beneficial
Resilience to frequent node failures
Suitably blend with the network architecture
Probably application dependent
Scalability to support large number of nodes
Thousands of nodes likely
Limited bandwidth availability
Would the 802.11 family of protocols work?
54
TDM-Based MAC
Considered for Clustered architecture
Nodes are organized into clusters
55
TDM-Based MAC, contd.
Advantages:
Simple to coordinate within cluster
No collisions
Can be more energy-efficient: members wake up
only when they have to send/receive data
Disadvantages:
Adjoining clusters need to coordinate to operate
in different channels (or frequencies)
TDM is not very scalable to large number of
nodes: high delays possible
Nodes need to be synchronized within each
cluster
56
S-MAC [Ye et. Al. 2002]
Sensor-MAC Protocol proposed in 2002
Assumptions
Network consists of several small nodes,
deployed in an ad hoc manner
Nodes dedicated to a single or few collaborative
applications: Per-node fairness is not critical
In-network processing assumed: e.g. data fusion,
data aggregation, collab signal processing
Long idle periods and occasional burst of data:
higher latency may be tolerated
57
S-MAC details, contd.
Periodic Listen and Sleep
Mode of operation
Each node sleeps for a
while; wakes up and
then communicates with
its neighbors, as
necessary.
Periodic synch among
neighbors to reduce drift
Pair-wise or group-wise
node synch
Nodes exchange
schedule by broadcast
MAC is still needed to
avoid collisions
58
Localization (Location Discovery)
Algorithms
59
Location Information
Itis essential, in some applications, for each node to
know its location
Sensed data coupled with loc. data and sent
60
Indoor Localization
Use a fixed infrastructure
Beacon nodes are strategically placed
Nodes receive beacon signals and measure:
Signal Strength
Signal Pattern
Time of arrival; Time difference of arrival
Angle of arrival
Nodes use measurements from multiple beacons
and use different multi-lateration techniques to
estimate locations
Accuracy of estimate depends on correlation
between measured entity and distance
61
Indoor Localization
Examples of Indoor Loc. Systems
RADAR (MSR), Cricket (MIT), BAT (AT&T), etc.
62
Sensor Net. Localization
No fixed infrastructure available
Prior measurements are not always possible
Basic idea:
Have a few sensor nodes who have known
location information
These nodes sent periodic beacon signals
64
Localization algorithms
Based on the time diff. of arrival
Atomic Multi-lateration:
If a node receives 3 becaons, it can determine its
location (similar to GPS)
Iterative ML:
Some nodes not in direct range of beacons
Once an unknown node estimates its location, will
send out a beacon
Multi-hop approach; Errors propagated
Collaborative ML:
When 2+ nodes cannot receive 3 beacons (but
can receive say 2), they collaborate
65
Multi-lateration examples
Beacon Nodes
Unknown Nodes
Beacon Nodes
Unknown Nodes
66
Exposure; Coverage and
Deployment
67
Coverage Problems
Coverage: is a measure of the Quality of service of
a sensor network
How well can the network observe (or cover) a given
event?
For example, intruder detection; animal or fire
detection
Coverage depends upon:
Range and sensitivity of sensing nodes
68
Coverage, contd.
Worst-Case Coverage: Areas of breach (lowest
coverage)
Can be used to determine if additional sensors
needed
Best-Case Coverage: Areas of best coverage
Can be used by a friendly user to navigate in
those areas
69
Coverage, contd.
Given: A field A with sensors S, where for each sensor $s_i
\in S$, its location (x_i, y_i) is known (How? Based on the
Localization Techniques described earlier). Areas I and F are
initial and final locations of an agent traversing the field.
Problem: Identify P_B, the maximal breach path in S,
starting in I and ending in F
P_B is defined as the locus of points p in the region,
where p is in P_B if the distance from p to the closest
sensor is maximized.
I and F are arbitrarily specified inputs.
70
Voronoi diagrams
In 2D, the Voronoi diagram
of a set of points partitions
the plane into a set of
convex polygons such that:
All points inside a
polygon are closest to
only one site.
The polygons have
edges equidistant from
nearby points.
Related is Delaunay
Triangulation
Connect points in V-
Diag. whose polygons
share a common edge.
71
Worst-Case Coverage: Alg.
1. Generate the bounded Voronoi diagram
a. Let U and L denote vertex set and links of diag.
72
Best-Case Coverage
Problem: Identify P_S, the path with maximum
support in S, starting at I and ending in F.
Solution: Use Delaunay triangulation
The best path will be one connecting some of the
sensor nodes
Similar approach to Max. Breach Path
Use Delaunay instead of Voronoi
73
Examples
74
Exposure Problems
Exposure is related to the coverage
Exposure may be defined as the expected ability of
observing a target in the sensor field
Formally defined as the integral of the sensing
function (depends on distance from sensors) on a
path from P_s to P_d
Sensing function depends on nature of sensors
Sensor model:
S ( s, p )
[d ( s, p)]k
, k are constants; and d ( s, p) is distance of point p from
sending node s
75
Exposure at a point
All-SensorField Intensity at Point p in field with n
sensors denoted by {s1 , s2 ,..., sn }
n
I A ( F , p) S ( si , p)
i 1
S min sm S | d ( sm , p) d ( si , p)si S
I C ( F , p) S ( S min , p)
76
Exposure along a path
Suppose object O is traveling from point p(t1) to
p(t2) along path p(t).
Exposure for object O during interval t1 to t2 along
p(t) is defined as:
t2
dp(t )
E[ p(t ), t1 , t 2 ] I ( A or C ) ( F , p(t )) dt
t1
dt
dp(t )
is the element of arc length
dt
If p(t) (x(t), y(t)) then
2
dx(t ) dy (t )
2
dp (t )
dt dt dt
77
Exposure: Properties
Consider only 1 sensor at location (0,0). Let
1
S [ s (0,0), p ( x, y )] 1
d ( s, p)
x2 y2
78
Exposure: Properties
Lemma 2: Given a sensor s and two points a and b, such
d(s,a)=d(s,b), then the minimum exposure path between a
and b is that part of the circle centered as s and passing
through a and b.
Theorem: Let the sensor be located at (0,0) in a unit field.
The minimum exposure path from (1,-1) to (-1,1) is as below:
S=(0,0)
79
Exposure: Properties
Let s be a sensor in a polygonal field with vertices
v1,…,vn.
For the inscribed circle of the polygon, let edge
v_i,v_{i+1} be tangent at point u_i
The minimum exposure path from vertex v_i to
vertex v_j consists of:
Line segment from v_i to u_i
Part of inscribed circle from u_i to u_j
Line segment from u_j to v_j
(OR) in the opposite direction (from v_i to u_j etc)
Problem of MEP between 2 points in same corner or
between 2 points inside the inscribed circle is open
80
Generic Exposure Problem
Given a network with randomly placed sensor
nodes, how to determine minimum exp. Path
Solution:
Tessellate the network into a set of equidistant
grid points (with varying degree of precision)
For each edge in the grid network, assign an
edge equal to the exposure along the edge
(integrated from the sensor function)
Using Dijkstra’s algorithm, determine the shortest
path from a source (based on edge weights)
This is the min. exposure path
81
Security in Sensor Networks
What is different ?
Unfriendly, unattended environments
Severe resource constraints render most of the
cryptographic mechanisms impossible
PKI is infeasible for sensor networks and have to
rely on symmetric key cryptography
Security has never been more important!
Applications in battlefield management,
emergency response systems and so on
Key management is the most critical issue
Focus of majority of the research
Following is review of some key research in the area
83
SPINS-Perrig et al, Berkeley
Complete suite of security protocols for sensor
networks
SNEP (Secure Network Encryption Protocol)
Data Confidentiality
Authentication
Integrity
Freshness
μTESLA
Lightweight version of TESLA for authenticated
broadcast
84
SPINS: Applications
Authenticated Routing
Base station can be authenticated using μTESLA
85
Key Management Scheme for DSN
Eschenauer et al, UMD (CCS 2002)
Based on probabilistic key sharing
Each node is equipped before deployment with a
key-ring chosen randomly from a common key pool
Each key has an identifier associated with it
Shared secret key is established between two nodes
by one of the two ways:
Broadcasting the key identifiers and comparing
them to find a common key if one exists
Sending a challenge encrypted in a key; a valid
response is a successful decryption of the
challenge establishing a shared key
86
Key Mgmt Contd
There may not be a shared key between a pair of
nodes
In such a case a path to one node from the other
is established through the secure links already in
place
A direct secure link is then established
87
Random Key Predistribution Schemes
Chan, Perrig et al, CMU, 2003
Proposes three random key predistribution schemes
q-Composite random key predistribution
Multi-path key reinforcement
Random pair-wise scheme
q-Composite random key predistribution
Builds on the work of Eschenauer and Gligor (referred to
as basic scheme)
Basic idea is to share q keys between nodes rather than
just one key
Final key is the hash of all q keys
An attacker now needs to capture more nodes in order to
eavesdrop on any link with given probability
88
q-Composite Predistribution Contd.
However choosing size |S| of common key pool is
tricky
Too large May not find q common keys
between every pair of node
Too small Attacker can get a large sample of
S by capturing just a few nodes
Choose largest |S| such that Pconnect ≥ P
Pconnect is the probability of two nodes sharing
sufficient keys to form a secure link (derived
mathematically)
P is the desired probability that two nodes form a
secure link
89
q-Composite Predistribution Contd.
q-Composite scheme thus makes small scale
attacks less appealing for an attacker
Attacker can only gain a little additional
information by capturing a few nodes
e.g. amount of additional communication
compromised when 50 nodes are captured is only
4.74% as compared to 9.52% for basic scheme
However makes network more vulnerable if large
number of nodes are captured
90
Multi-path Key Reinforcement
Need to update the key once a secure link has been
formed between two nodes
To prevent attacker from obtaining and using the
old key by capturing other nodes
Node A sends j random values over multiple disjoint
secure paths to node B
The new key is computed from all the j values
Attacker has to eavesdrop on j paths in order to
construct the key
The neighbors on those paths are called reinforcing
neighbors
91
Multi-path Key Reinforcement Contd
Significantnetwork overheads (~10X)
The method is not as effective when used with q-
Composite
Both the methods essentially do the same thing
But their weakness compound each other
Small key pool and high network overheads
92
Random pair-wise Key Scheme
Targeted at Node-to-Node authentication without
any help from the base station
Each node need only save a random set of n*p keys
instead of all n-1 keys
p is the smallest probability that any two nodes
have a shared key such that all nodes have
shared keys with some high probability
Nodes are predeployed with m random pair-wise
keys for m other nodes
Node broadcasts its identifier once deployed
Mutual key agreement with the neighbors takes
place by cryptographic handshake
93
Random pair-wise Key Scheme Contd
Multi-hop range extension is simple with having
neighbors rebroadcast the identifiers further
Must be used to a limited number of hops to
prevent DoS attack by an adversary
Distributed node revocation is possible by having
nodes broadcast public votes against a misbehaving
node
Mechanism for detecting misbehavior assumed at
each node
If A receives more than a threshold number of votes
are against B, it cuts off all communication with B
Many practical issues arise!
94
Random pair-wise Key Scheme Contd
Node replication can be resisted by limiting the max
degree of each node
Degree counting is modeled in a similar way as
vote counting for node revocation
Complete resilience against node capture
A compromised node does not provide any further
information
Large network size supported
n = m/p where m is the key-ring size of a node
and p is the smallest probability that any two
nodes have a shared key such that all nodes
have shared keys with some high probability
95
Testbeds and Applications
96
Habitat Monitoring
Traditional human monitoring methods for habitats
are invasive and cause negative impact
Often, repeated visits necessary to collect data
98
GDI Project, contd.
The sensor nodes are Berkeley Motes (40 Kbps radio, 4 MHz
ATMEL chips, 512KB storage)
Motes encased in transparent acryclic enclosure
As of July 2002, 32 motes (nine in underground burrows)
Data collection and evaluation in progress
99