Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Hybrid simulation of Sensor and Actor Networks with BARAKA

  • Published:
Wireless Networks Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We present BARAKA, a new hybrid simulator for Sensor and Actor Networks (SANETs). This tool provides integrated simulation of communication networks and robotic aspects. It allows the complete modelling of co-operation issues in SANETs including the performance evaluation of either robot actions or networking aspects while considering mutual impact. This hybrid simulation enables new potentials in the evaluation of algorithms developed for communication and co-operation in SANETs. Previously, evaluations in this context were accomplished separately. On the one hand, network simulation helps to measure the efficiency of routing or medium access. On the other hand, robot simulators are used to evaluate the physical movements. Using two different simulators might introduce inconsistent results, and might make the transfer on real hardware harder. With the development of methods and techniques for co-operation in SANETs, the need for integrated evaluation environment increased. To compensate this demand, we developed BARAKA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We use the word agent in the following when we refer to either the entities of a SANET.

  2. Robots can sense obstacles using several devices: infra-red sensors, lasers, radars, cameras, bumpers, etc. Each of them has some advantages and disadvantages. Infrared-sensors, for instance, are cheap but work at short range and cannot return the detailed shape of an object. It might difficult to tell an obstacle, which has to be avoided, from a target, which has to be reached. Cameras can give more detailed information, but image processing requires a lot of computational power. It is possible to combine data coming from different sensors to overcome such problems, but this increases the complexity of sensor data elaboration. The reader can refer to [7] and [8] for some examples.

  3. http://www.opnet.com/

  4. http://www.scalable-networks.com/

  5. http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/

  6. http://www.omnetpp.org/

  7. http://www.cyberbotics.com/

  8. http://www.cm-labs.com/products/vortex/

  9. http://www.havok.com/

  10. http://sserver.sourceforge.net/

  11. http://mobility-fw.sourceforge.net/

  12. http://ode.org

  13. http://www.openrobertino.org/

  14. http://www.openrobertino.org/hw/dimensions/overview.html

  15. It is not the purpose of our work to address this problems, but it might be done, e.g., by triangulating the signal emitted by a node, by using directional antennas, or by means of a vision system.

  16. Some movies from this experiment, can be seen at http://www7.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/~labella/comsware07.html.

References

  1. Akyildiz, I., & Kasimoglu, I. (2004). Wireless sensor and actor networks: Research challenges. Ad Hoc Networks, 2, 351–367.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Melodia, T., Pompili, D., Gungor, V., & Akyildiz, I. (2005). A distributed coordination framework for wireless sensor and actor networks. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing (ACM Mobihoc 2005) (pp. 99–110). New York, NY: ACM Press.

  3. Batalin, M., & Sukhatme, G. (2004). Using a sensor network for distributed multi-robot task allocation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA2004) (Vol. 1, pp.158–164). New York, NY: IEEE Press.

  4. Melodia, T., Pompili, D., & Akyildiz, I. (2006). A communication architecture for mobile wireless sensor and actor networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Sensor, Mesh and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks (SECON 2006). New York, NY: IEEE Press.

  5. Dressler, F. (2006). Network-centric actuation control in sensor/actuator networks based on bio-inspired technologies. In: 3rd IEEE International Conference on Mobile Ad Hoc and Sensor Systems (IEEE MASS 2006): 2nd International Workshop on Localized Communication and Topology Protocols for Ad hoc Networks (LOCAN 2006), Vancouver, Canada.

  6. Labella, T., & Dressler, F. (2006). A bio-inspired architecture for division of labour in SANETs. In: Proceedings of the First IEEE/ACM International Conference on Bio Inspired Models of Network, Information and Computing Systems (BIONETICS 2006). Italy: Cavalese.

  7. Manduchi, R., Castano, A., Talukder, A., & Matthies, L. (2005). Obstacle detection and terrain classification for autonomous off-road navigation. Autonomous Robots, 18, 81–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Jia, S., Sheng, J., Chugo, D., & Takase, K. (2007). Obstacle recognition for a mobile robot in indoor environments using RFID and stereo vision. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Mechatronics and Automation, (ICMA 2007) (pp. 2789–2794). New York, NY: IEEE Press.

  9. Law, A., & David Kelton, W. (2000). Simulation modeling and analysis (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Johnson, D., Hu, Y. C., & Maltz, D. (2007). The dynamic source routing protocol (DSR) for mobile ad hoc networks for IPv4. IETF RFC 4728.

  11. Perkins, C., Belding-Royer, E., & Das, S. (2003). Ad hoc on demand distance vector (AODV) routing. IETF RFC 3561.

  12. Fujimoto, R., Perumalla, K., Park, A., Wu, H., Ammar, M., & Riley, G. (2003). Large-scale network simulation: How big? how fast? In: Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer Telecommunications Systems (MASCOTS 2003) (pp. 116–123). New York, NY: IEEE Press.

  13. Breslau, L., Estrin, D., Fall, K., Floyd, S., Heidemann, J., Helmy, A., et al. (2000). Advances in network simulation. IEEE Computer, 33, 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Heidemann, J., Bulusu, N., Elson, J., Intanagonwiwat, C., Lan, K. C., Xu, Y., et al. (2001). Effects of detail in wireless network simulation. In: SCS Multiconference on Distributed Simulation, pp. 3–11

  15. Pawlikowski, K., Jeong, H. D., & Lee, J. S. (2002). On credibility of simulation studies of telecommunication networks. IEEE Communications Magazine, 40(1), 132–139.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sundresh, S., Kim, W., & Agha, G. (2004). SENS: A sensor, environment and network simulator. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Simulation Symposium (pp. 221–228). New York, NY: IEEE Press.

  17. Camp, T., Boleng, J., & Davies, V. (2002). A survey of mobility models for ad hoc network research. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing: Special Issue on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking: Research, Trends and Applications, 2, 483–502.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bai, F., & Helmy, A. (2004). A survey of mobility modeling and analysis in wireless ad hoc networks. In: Wireless ad hoc and sensor networks. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  19. Kitano, H., Asada, M., Kuniyoshi, Y., Noda, I., Osawa, E., & Matsubara, H. (1997). Robocup: A challenge AI problem. AI Magazine, 18, 73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gerkey, B., Vaughan, R., & Howard, A. (2003). The player/stage project: Tools for multi-robot and distributed sensor systems. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Robotics (ICAR 2003) (pp. 317–323). Portugal: Coimbra.

  21. Parker, L. (1997). L-ALLIANCE: Task-oriented multi-robot learning in behavior-based systems. Journal of Advanced Robotics, 11(4), 305–322.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Varga, A. (2001). The OMNeT++ discrete event simulation system. In: Proceedings of the 15th European Simulation Multiconference (ESM’2001). Nottingham, UK: European Council for Modelling and Simulation.

  23. Dorigo, M., Trianni, V., Şahin, E., Groß, R., Labella, T., Baldassarre, G., et al. (2004). Evolving self-organizing behaviors for a Swarm-Bot. Autonomous Robots, 17, 223–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Di Caro, G., Ducatelle, F., & Gambardella, L. (2005). AntHocNet: An adaptive nature-inspired algorithm for routing in mobile ad hoc networks. European Transactions on Telecommunications, Special Issue on Self-organization in Mobile Networking, 16, 443–455.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Labella, T. (2007). Division of Labour in Groups of Robots. PhD thesis, Université Libre de Bruxells.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thomas Halva Labella thanks the DAAD (Deutscher Akademischer Austausch Dienst), grant number 331 4 03 003, for the fellowship that funded this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Autonomic Networking Group, Department of Computer Science 7, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Martensstr. 3, 91058, Erlangen, Germany

    Thomas Halva Labella, Isabel Dietrich & Falko Dressler

Authors
  1. Thomas Halva Labella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Isabel Dietrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Falko Dressler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Halva Labella.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Labella, T.H., Dietrich, I. & Dressler, F. Hybrid simulation of Sensor and Actor Networks with BARAKA. Wireless Netw 16, 1525–1539 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11276-008-0134-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11276-008-0134-1

Keywords