Wireless Sensor Networks for Habitat Monitoring Alan Mainwaring1 Joseph Polastre2 Robert Szewczyk2 David Culler1,2 John Anderson3 1: Intel Research Laboratory at Berkeley 2: University of California, Berkeley 3: College.

Download Report

Transcript Wireless Sensor Networks for Habitat Monitoring Alan Mainwaring1 Joseph Polastre2 Robert Szewczyk2 David Culler1,2 John Anderson3 1: Intel Research Laboratory at Berkeley 2: University of California, Berkeley 3: College.

Wireless Sensor Networks
for Habitat Monitoring
Alan Mainwaring1
Joseph Polastre2
Robert Szewczyk2
David Culler1,2
John Anderson3
1: Intel Research Laboratory at Berkeley
2: University of California, Berkeley
3: College of the Atlantic
Introduction
• Application Driven System Design, Research,
and Implementation
• Parameterizes Systems Research:
–
–
–
–
Localization
Calibration
Routing and Low-Power Communications
Data Consistency, Storage, and Replication
• How Can All of these Services and Systems Be
Integrated into a Complete Application?
Great Duck Island
• Breeding area for Leach’s
Storm Petrel (pelagic seabird)
• Ecological models may use
multiple parameters such as:
– Burrow (nest) occupancy during
incubation
– Differences in the micro-climates
of active vs. inactive burrows
– Environmental conditions during
7 month breeding season
Application
> 1000 ft
Sensor Network Solution
Outline
• Application Requirements
• Habitat Monitoring Architecture
–
–
–
–
–
Sensor Node
Power Management
Sensor Patch
Transit Network
Wide Area Network and Disconnected Operation
• Sensor Data
• System Analysis
• Real World Challenges
Application Requirements
• Sensor Network
–
–
–
–
–
Longevity: 7-9 months
Space: Must fit inside Small Burrow
Quantity: Approximately 50 per patch
Environmental Conditions
Varying Geographic Distances
• Inconspicuous Operation
– Reduce the “observer effect”
• Data
– As Much as Possible in the Power Budget
– Iterative Process
Application Requirements
• Predictable System Behavior
– Reliable
– Meaningful Sensor Readings
• Multiple Levels of Connectivity
– Management at a Distance
– Intermittent Connectivity
– Operating Off the Grid
– Hierarchy of Networks / Data Archiving
Habitat Monitoring Architecture
Patch
Network
Sensor Node
Sensor Patch
Gateway
Transit Network
Client Data Browsing
and Processing
Basestation
Base-Remote Link
Internet
Data Service
Sensor Node: Mica
• Hardware
– Atmel AVR w/ 512kB Flash
– 916MHz 40kbps Radio
• Range: max 100 ft
• Affected by obstacles, RF propogation
– 2 AA Batteries
• Operating: 15mA
• Sleep: 50mA
• Software
–
–
–
–
TinyOS / C Applications
Power Management
Digital Sensor Drivers
Remote Management & Diagnositcs
Sensor Node: Power Management
Expected Lifetime (days)
• AA Batteries have ~2500 mAh capacity
• Mica consumes 50mA in sleep = 1.2 mAh/day
Mica Expected Lifetime
Number of Operating Hours per Day
Node Activity
Days Years
Mica Always On
7
0.1
Mica Always Sleeping
2081
5.7
Sensor Node: Power Management
• Target Lifetime: 7-8 months
• Power Budget: 6.9mAh/day
• Questions:
– What can be done?
– How often?
– What is the resulting sample
rate?
Operation
nAh
Transmitting a packet
20.000
Receiving a packet
8.000
Radio Listening for 1ms
1.250
Operating Sensor for 1s (analog)
1.080
Operating Sensor for 1s (digital)
0.347
Reading a Sample from the ADC
0.011
Flash Read Data
1.111
Flash Program/Erase Data
83.333
Operation
Operating Time per Day
Duty Cycle
Sample Rate
Always Sleep
24 hours
0%
0 samples/day
+ mCPU on
52 minutes
3.61%
0 samples/day
+ Radio On (Listen)
28 minutes
1.94%
0 samples/day
+ Sample All Sensors
21 minutes
1.45%
630 samples/day
+ Transmit Samples
20 minutes
1.38%
600 samples/day
Sensor Node: Mica Weather Board
• Digital Sensor Interface to Mica
– Onboard ADC
• Designed for Low Power Operation
– Individual digital switch
for each sensor
• Designed to Coexist with
Other Sensor Boards
– Hardware “Enable”
Protocol to obtain
exclusive access
to connector
resources
Sensor Node: Mica Weather Board
Sensor
Accuracy
Interchange
Max Rate
Startup
Current
Photo
N/A
10%
2000 Hz
10 ms
1.235 mA
I2C Temp
1K
0.2 K
2 Hz
500 ms
0.150 mA
Pressure
1.5 mbar
0.5%
10 Hz
500 ms
0.010 mA
Press Temp
0.8 K
0.24 K
10 Hz
500 ms
0.010 mA
Humidity
2%
3%
500 Hz
500 ms
0.775 mA
Thermopile
3K
5%
2000 Hz
200 ms
0.170 mA
Thermistor
5K
10%
2000 Hz
10 ms
0.126 mA
Important to Biologists
Affect Power Budget
Sensor Node: Packaging
• Parylene Sealant
• Acrylic Enclosures
Sensor Patch Network
• Transmit Only Network
• Single Hop
• Repeaters
– 2 hop initially
– Most Energy Challenged
• Adheres to
Power Budget
• Nodes:
– Approximately 50
– Half in burrows, Half outside
– RF unpredictable
• Burrows
• Obstacles
• Drop packets or retry?
Transit Network
• Two implementations
– Linux (CerfCube)
– Relay Mote
• Antennae
– No gain antenna (small)
– Omnidirectional
– Yagi (Directional)
• Implementation of transit
network depends on:
– Distance
– Obstacles
– Power Budget
• Duty cycle of sensor
nodes dictates transit
network duty cycle
Transit Network
• Renewable Energy Sources
T otalWattsHours per Day
1

 Size
Peak Winte
r Hours
0.065W/in2
– CerfCube needs 60Wh/day
– Assuming an average
peak of 1 direct sunlight hour
per day:
– Panel must be 924 in2
or 30” x 30” for a
5” x 5” device!
– A mote only needs 2Wh per
day, or a panel 6” x 6”
Base Station / Wide Area Network
• Disconnected Operation and
Multiple Levels of State
– Laptop
• DirecWay Satellite WAN
• PostgreSQL
• 47% uptime
– Redundancy and Replication
• Increase number of points of failure
– Remote Access
• Physical Access Limited
– Keep state all areas of
network
– Resiliency to
• Disconnection
• Network Failures
• Packet Loss
– Potential Solution:
Keep Local Caches
Synchronization
Sensor Data Analysis
Sensor Data Analysis
Outside Burrow
Inside Burrow
System Analysis
•
Power Management Goals
– Calculated 7 months, expect
4 months
– Battery half-life at 1.2V
Battery Consumption at Node 57
•
Predictable Operation
– Observed per node constant
throughput, % loss
– 739,846 samples as of 9/23,
network is still running
Packet Throughput and Active Nodes
Real World Experiences
• System and Sensor Network Challenges
– Low Power Operation (low duty cycle)
• Affects hardware and software implementation
– Multihop Routing
• Allows bigger patches
• Route around physical obstacles
• Must have ~1% operating duty cycle
– In Situ Retasking/Reconfiguration
• Let biologists interactively change data collection patterns
• Not Implemented due to conservative energy implementation
– Lack of Physical Access
•
•
•
•
Remote management
Disconnected operation
Fault tolerance
Reliance on other people and their networks
– Physical Size of Device
• Affects microcontroller selection, radio, practical choice of power
sources
Real World Experiences
• Failures
– Extended Loss of Wide Area Connectivity
– Unreliable Reboot Sequence in Windows
– Solderless Connections Fail
(expansion/contraction cycles)
– Node Attrition (Petrels are not mote neutral)
– Environmental Conditions (50km/hr gale
winds knock over equipment)
– Lack of post-mortem diagnositics
Conclusions
• First long term outdoor wireless sensor
network application
• Application driven sensor network design
– Defines requirements and constraints on core
system components (routing, retasking, fault
tolerance, power management)
Backup Slides
Mote 18: Outside
Mote 26: Burrow 115a
Mote 53: Burrow 115b
Mote 47: Burrow 88a
Mote 40: Burrow 88b
Mote 39: Burrow 84