| Literature DB >> 23202185 |
Laurie Hughes1, Xinheng Wang, Tao Chen.
Abstract
The issues inherent in caring for an ever-increasing aged population has been the subject of endless debate and continues to be a hot topic for political discussion. The use of hospital-based facilities for the monitoring of chronic physiological conditions is expensive and ties up key healthcare professionals. The introduction of wireless sensor devices as part of a Wireless Body Area Network (WBAN) integrated within an overall eHealth solution could bring a step change in the remote management of patient healthcare. Sensor devices small enough to be placed either inside or on the human body can form a vital part of an overall health monitoring network. An effectively designed energy efficient WBAN should have a minimal impact on the mobility and lifestyle of the patient. WBAN technology can be deployed within a hospital, care home environment or in the patient’s own home. This study is a review of the existing research in the area of WBAN technology and in particular protocol adaptation and energy efficient cross-layer design. The research reviews the work carried out across various layers of the protocol stack and highlights how the latest research proposes to resolve the various challenges inherent in remote continual healthcare monitoring.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23202185 PMCID: PMC3522938 DOI: 10.3390/s121114730
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.WBAN positioning.
Figure 2.WBAN consisting of various wireless biosensors.
Figure 3.Typical WBAN architecture.
Figure 4.Simplified ZigBee/802.15.4 protocol stack.
Figure 5.IEEE 802.15.6 high level architecture.
Comparison between CSMA/CA and TDMA.
| Power consumption | High | Low |
| Efficiency at light traffic | Good | Poor |
| Efficiency at high traffic | Poor | Good |
| Bandwidth utilization | Low | Maximum |
| Scalability | Good | Poor |
| Effect of packet failure | Low | Latency |
| Synchronization | Not applicable | Required |
Low power MAC protocol.
| S-MAC | Saves energy by switching between active and sleep states. Maintains a common sleep schedule between neighbor nodes in low duty cycle operations. Duty cycle needs synchronizing to a specific load which can affect performance. |
| T-MAC | Uses adaptive duty cycle to dynamically end active part of the cycle to reduce energy wasted on idle listening. Can suffer from idle listening, reduced throughput, and increased latency. |
| DMAC | Utilizes data gathering trees to solve interruption problem. Adapts duty cycle depending on load. |
| B-MAC | Incorporates preamble sampling to reduce wakeup period. Drawback is that all nodes need to listen to the long preamble. |
| WiseMAC | Uses preamble sampling to mitigate overhearing and reduce power consumption. WiseMAC suffers from a long preamble and has no mechanism to adapt to changing traffic patterns. For the same delay, preamble sampling lowered power consumption by 57% when compared to 802.15.4. |
| X-MAC | Uses reduced length preamble, early node acknowledgement resulting in increased energy savings. Offers flexible adaptation to both bursty and periodic data sources. |
| NCCARQ-WSN | Network coding based. Uses less control packets than traditional cooperative ARQ protocols. Up to 50% more energy efficient without compromising QoS. |
| NC-PAN | Uses a hybrid cooperative network coded ARQ technique. Performance gains of up to 35% compared to B-PAN and C-PAN. |
WBAN MAC protocols.
| MedMac | Allows nodes with ultra low data rates to save power by sleeping through beacons normally received to synchronize with the network. Achieved energy savings of up to 87% over 802.15.6 for the selected scenarios. |
| BodyMAC | Gives flexible bandwidth allocation to improve energy efficiency by reducing packet collisions, lowering transmission times, idle listening and control packet overhead. Efficient sleep mode used to reduce idle listening duration for low duty cycles. Demonstrates superior performance compared to 802.15.4. |
| BSN-MAC | Designed to exploit feedback information from nodes to deliver increased energy efficiency. Control algorithm enables the BSN coordinator to adjust parameters in the 802.15.4 superframe structure to avoid idle listening and achieve both energy efficiency and low latency on energy critical nodes. |
| DQ-MAC | Grants immediate access for light traffic loads (behaving as a random access mechanism) and moves to a reservation system for high traffic loads, eliminating collisions for all data transmissions. Delivers energy saving improvements over BSN-MAC and 802.15.4. |
| H-MAC | Exploits heartbeat rhythm to perform time synchronization for TDMA. nodes use heart rate waveform peaks for node synchronization. Nodes can achieve synchronization without having to turn on their radio. Energy cost for time synchronization can be avoided, thereby increasing the lifetime of the network. Limitation of single point of failure. |
| CA-MAC | Adopts different transmission strategies, depending on variation of patient activity, vital life signs or environment status. Protocol incorporates a hybrid mechanism for channel access using TDMA and contention-based model to reduce energy consumption and latency. Demonstrated packet loss rate of 50% lower than comparable MACs with reasonable tradeoff between reliability and efficiency. |
| Power Efficient MAC | On-demand wakeup radio mechanism. Additional receiver attached to the sensor node operates independently from main node radio to reduce idle listening and reduce power consumption. Model incorporates periodic and emergency traffic scenarios. Offers improvements in terms of power efficiency and delay in single hop scenarios compared to B-MAC, X-MAC, WiseMAC and ZigBee (802.15.4). |
| TaMAC | Adapted to cater for |
| TDMA directional MAC | Differentiates between normal and urgent traffic using two BAN coordinators.Urgent packets are directed to a secondary BAN coordinator when the node doesn't have its own guaranteed time slot. |
Low power Network protocols.
| TARA | Handles packet transmission in presence of temperature hot spots by routing round areas that exceed temperature thresholds. Results demonstrate a safer routing solution whilst balancing transmission delay with less network congestion |
| ALTR | Improves on the performance of TARA by routing packets to the least highest temperature node. |
| LTRT | Converts node temperatures into graph weights to generate minimum temperature routes. Sends packets with the shortest hop counts and prevents the entire network temperature from rising quickly. Results showed packets required less hop counts in comparison with LTR and ALTR. |
| LR | Divides nodes into small clusters and generated lower levels of temperature than LTRT and ALTR |
| LEACH | Introduces data fusion into the routing protocol to reduce the amount of information transmitted to the sink. Deliver significant improvements when compared to conventional routing protocols. |
| BECCRP | Improved upon LEACH where it sets gateways to relay the data from the cluster heads to share energy at each node to extend the overall network lifetime. Doesn't consider node location and distance from other nodes. |
Low power cross-layer protocols.
| CAEM | Allows a node to dynamically adjust data throughput by changing levels of error protection at the node according to quality of the link, estimated bandwidth, and traffic load. Protocol buffers the packet until the channel recovers to the required quality. Performance gains of up to 30% compared to traditional protocols. |
| CoLaNet | Incorporates the characteristics of the application to make better routing path choices at the network layer and demonstrated energy savings over S-MAC. |
| TICOSS | Based on 802.15.4. Network is divided into time zones where each one takes turn in transmitting. Mitigates the hidden node problem, provides configurable shortest path routing to the BCU and almost doubles node lifetime for high traffic scenarios compared to other standard protocols. |
| SCSP | Dynamically calculates node sleep and data receive periods depending on traffic levels. MAC layer provides the list of neighbor nodes to the network layer, which in turn provides multiple forwarding choices to it. Switches between active and sleep periods by dynamically adapting modes depending on traffic levels. Uses a simple routing protocol that doesn't need route maintenance or discovery. Extends the network lifetime and connectivity in comparison with 802.15.4. |
| QoS Adaptive Cross-layer Congestion Contol | Incorporates an adaptive cross-layer mechanism to control congestion for real and non-real time data flow to support QoS guarantees at the application layer. Priority given to real time data for delay and available link capacity. Scheme links the QoS requirements at the application layer and packet waiting time, collision resolution, and packet transmission time metrics at the MAC layer. |
| CC-MAC | Cross-layer solution incorporating the application and MAC layers. Exploits the spatial correlation between nodes to reduce energy consumption without compromising reliability at the sink. Delivers improved performance over S-MAC and T-MAC in terms of energy efficiency, packet drop rate, and latency. |
| DQBAN | Incorporates a fuzzy rule scheduler that optimizes the MAC layer to improve overall performance for QoS and energy consumption. Considers node cross-layer constraints such as SNR, waiting time, and battery life to allocate superframe slots. Protocol achieves higher reliabilities compared to 802.15.4 whilst delivering specific latency demands and battery limitations. |
| XLM | Replaces the entire layered architecture by a single protocol where the objective is reliable communication with minimal energy consumption, adaptive communication, and local congestion avoidance. Each node has the freedom to decide on participating in communication. XLM outperforms the traditional layered protocol stack in terms of performance and implementation complexity. |
| XLP | Extends XLM and merges the functionalities of traditional MAC, routing and congestion control into a unified cross-layer module by considering physical layer and channel effects avoiding the need for end-to-end congestion control. |