Special issue on International Workshop on Networked Sensing System
Trans. of the Society of Instrument
and Control Engineers
Vol.E-S-1, No.1, 74/84 (2005)

PAVENET: A Hardware and Software Framework for WirelessSensor Networks
Shunsuke Saruwatari ∗ , Takuya Kashima ∗∗ , Masateru Minami ∗∗∗ ,Hiroyuki Morikawa ∗ and Tomonori Aoyama ∗∗Wireless sensor networks are attracting attention as a neural system in the coming ubiquitous computing environment. Building a realistic architecture requires a testbed that meets various demands. Therefore, we havedesigned and implemented a wireless sensor network testbed called PAVENET. PAVENET consists of a hardware
module U3 , U3 SDK, which is a development kit for U3 software, and basenode software, which supports thedevelopment of wireless sensor network technology. PAVENET has four characteristic features: hardware level
modularization, dual-CPU architecture, hard real-time transaction support, and network layering APIs. Thesefeatures help us to develop not only application functions, but also wireless communication functions. This paper
describes implementation details and a number of implemented applications, such as ANtennary THings, a traﬃcline detection system, and media access control (MAC) performance evaluation system.
Key Words: Wireless Sensor Networks, Embedded Systems, Ubiquitous Computing, Middleware

1.

Introduction

constructed by single-CPU architecture, are constrained
because software tasks for wireless communications con-

Sensor networks can relay real-world information into

sume a great deal of computing resources. In order tothe virtual world that is constructed by computer net-

realize these innovative applications, the next-generation

works. We can create various services using these sensor

sensor network testbed should not limit application de-

networks. As a primitive application of sensor networks, avelopment.

simple data gathering service has attracted a great deal of

Based on these considerations, we design and imple-

attention from researchers. In order to realize these prim-

ment a hardware and software framework for wireless sen-itive applications, a number of wireless communication

sor networks, called “PAVENET”, that supports the con-technologies, such as routing protocols and MAC (media

struction of various applications. PAVENET includes U3 ,access control) schemes, have been proposed 1)∼3) .

which is a dual-CPU wireless sensor node, U3 SDK, which

The dawn of sensor network technology is coming to

is a software development kit for U3 , and basenode soft-an end, and new applications of sensor networks are de-ware, which supports application development and oper-

sired. Thus, a sensor network testbed is necessary in orderates sensor networks.

to develop innovative applications using sensor network

PAVENET has the following characteristic features;

technology. The testbed would also have to equip func-• hardware level modularization

tions for the development of new wireless communication• dual-CPU architecture

protocols that support the applications.

• hard real-time transaction support

There are several testbeds for wireless sensor networks,• network layering APIs

including MICA Mote 4) and Smart-Its 5) . However, us-

PAVENET divided the functionality of the sensor nodeing these testbeds for next-generation sensor network ser-

into four physically separated modules: a power con-vices is diﬃcult because these testbeds are designed astrol module, a system software module, a communica-

single-CPU architecture in order to construct simple ser-tion module, and a device module. This hardware levelvices, such as data gathering. The services, which can be

modularization enables us to independently replace each∗function, such as power control, wireless communication∗∗

devices, CPU, and sensors. On the other hand, conven-

School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo
School of Information Science and Technology, The University of Tokyo∗∗∗ Department of Electronic Engineering, Shibaura Instituteof Technology

tional sensor network nodes, such as MICA Mote 4) , only
allow replacement of the sensor board.

T. SICE Vol.E-S-1 No.1 January 200575

PAVENET has dual-CPU architecture, even thoughminiaturization and low power consumption. In regard

most existing testbeds for sensor networks are built us-

to wireless sensor networks, a smaller sensor node means

ing single-CPU architecture. This dual-CPU architecture

broader application, because installation locations, suchprovides a number of advantages, including the ability

as walls or ceilings, of wireless sensor nodes vary widely.

to develop applications and communication protocols eas-

For example, the Smart Dust project assumes extremely

ily, the ability to evaluate communication protocols easily,

small sensor nodes to be ﬂoating in the air 9) .

and assistance when considering future developments onover, because some nodes, such as mobile sensor nodes,

the hardware level.

are battery-powered, wireless sensor networks require a

More-Hard real-time transaction support for application soft-

low-power-consumption architecture that can run contin-

ware is realized by dual-CPU architecture and a simple

uously over several years. If we assume indoor use ofpriority based task scheduler. Most existing testbeds arewireless sensor networks, then we can also assume theconstructed based on single-CPU architecture. However,existence of power-supplied nodes. However, we cannot

MAC transactions in wireless communication may require

ignore power consumption considerations because a slight

real-time transaction support, and the transaction tasks

increase in the power consumption of each node results

occupy computing resources.

Accordingly, application

in a huge increase in the power consumption of the en-software is highly constrained by the MAC transaction

tire wireless sensor network system. This is because wire-task. PAVENET adopts dual-CPU architecture, expand-less sensor networks have from several hundreds to several

ing the capabilities of applications that can be developed.

thousands of nodes.

Network layering is needed in order to more easily de-However, limiting the creativity of application develop-

velop wireless communication functions. In order to real-

ment by excessively prioritizing miniaturization and low

ize the network layering, we separated the network func-

power consumption is undesirable. Currently, the mosttions into several parts and deﬁne simple interfaces be-important objective is to create novel sensor network ap-

tween them. Therefore, PAVENET can enable us to de-plications.

velop functions more easily and simply than existing soft-

miniaturization and low power consumption only after ex-

ware frameworks, such as nesC 6) and MANTIS 7) .

tracting elemental functions for applications.

In order to evaluate PAVENET as a testbed, we de-2. 2

We should work toward the realization of

Requirements

veloped ANTH (ANtennary THings), which is a real-

PAVENET is an attempt to construct a hard-

space programming framework 8) , and a traﬃc line de-ware/software framework that can be used not only totection system. Furthermore, we developed the 802.11-

create attractive sensor network applications, but also tolike CSMA MAC protocol and a number of measurement

extract basic functions that support it.

tools using PAVENET and conducted performance measurement of the MAC protocol.

Toward this purpose, hardware/software level modularization and consideration of which function will be real-

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Sec-

ized by hardware/software transaction in the future aretion 2 describes the characteristics of the wireless sensor

important. A trade-oﬀ exists between modularization andnetwork, and extracts requirements in order to develop aminiaturization. If we would like to realize a sensor node

testbed. Section 3 describes in detail the U3 , U3 SDK,of very small size and low price, all functions should be

and basenode software, which are implemented based on

implemented on one LSI chip. However, implementing

extracted requirements in Section 2. Section 4 evaluates

all functions on one LSI chip reduces ﬂexibility, and im-

the proposed framework through a number of applications

proving individual functions or adding new functions isand an experiment. Section 5 describes a comparison be-diﬃcult. Since sensor network technologies are not ma-

tween our testbed and the other testbeds as related work,ture, PAVENET gives greater priority to modularizationand Section 6 concludes the present paper.

than to miniaturization.

2.

DesignIn order to realize modularization, we adopt not
only software-level modularization, but also physical-level

In this section, we clarify the characteristics of wire-

modularization. There is a wide range of potential appli-

less sensor networks and extract the requirements for thecations and protocols for sensor networks. For environ-

wireless sensor network testbed.

mental monitoring applications, a generic sensor interface

Characteristics of wireless sensor networks

would be useful for wireless nodes, so that the sensors

Wireless sensor networks have two characteristics:

could be easily replaced. Solar panels and rechargeable

2. 1

76

T. SICE Vol.E-S-1 No.1 2005

batteries would also be advantageous for practical appli-

LSI achieves miniaturization and low power consumption

cations. Moreover, the user may wish to select the appro-

simultaneously. However, it also has the disadvantages

priate CPU and wireless communication devices accordingof not being able to be modiﬁed and a lack of ﬂexibil-

to power consumption or processing speed requirements,

ity. Therefore, we focused on the ﬁrst type of energy

or according to instructions that will be given to the sen-eﬃciency, which is achieved by improvement of the rel-sor. In order to meet these requirements, the hardware

evant algorithms, indicating the importance of the easecomponents of the sensor node should be constructed aswith which communication protocols can be evaluated.

an ensemble of independent modules that can be easily

Finally, in the future, it will be helpful to consider the

replaced. However, conventional sensor network nodes,

classiﬁcation of tasks into hardware transaction tasks andsuch as MICA Mote 4) , only allow replacement of the sen-software transaction tasks. In order to realize low powersor board. Other components, such as the CPU, the wire-

consumption and miniaturization of wireless sensor nodes,

less communication module or the battery module, are nota number of the functions of the wireless sensor node must

replaceable.

be implemented on the hardware level. In particular, sim-

To this end, we divided the functionality of the sensor

ple, steady, parallel, and high-speed software transactions

node into four physically separated modules: a power con-consume an enormous amount of electric power, but trans-

trol module, a system software module, a communication

acting these functions in hardware is less power consuming

module, and a device module.

than in software. Therefore, we assume that simple ad-

In addition, PAVENET adopts dual-CPU architecture

hoc routing functions, MAC functions, and physical layer

because sensor network functions can be classiﬁed intofunctions, such as error correction, will be implemented

two parts: wireless communication functions and func-

on the hardware layer.

tions for applications. This dual-CPU architecture pro-

In PAVENET, we realize not only physical level modularization, but also software level modularization. Since

vides the following advantages.
First, this architecture enables applications and com-wireless communication protocols are a very importantmunication protocols to be developed easily. Generally,

feature in wireless sensor networks, we deﬁne several APIs

the application developer and the communication proto-that provide layered abstracted communication structure

col developer are not the same. Therefore, being able to(application, media access, and physical layer). As a con-disregard overhead between application tasks and commu-

sequence of this software level modularization, users cannication tasks is important in order to facilitate software

select several protocols according to application demands,

development. In addition, this enables software to eas-such as power consumption, and latency.

ily support hard real-time processing because the wireless3.

communication functions and application functions can
independently appropriate computing resources.
Next, this allows us to easily evaluate communication
protocols such as MAC protocols.

Implementation

According to the design mentioned reported in Section
2, we implemented a hardware and software framework

Since communica-

for wireless sensor networks called PAVENET, which pro-tion transactions and application transactions are sepa-

vides support for the construction of various applications.

rate on the hardware level, we can independently eval-

PAVENET includes U3 , which is a dual-CPU wireless sen-uate the characteristics of the communication protocol,

sor node, U3 SDK, which is a software development kit

such as power consumption. The power consumption isfor U3 , and basenode software, which supports the de-not proportional to the number of CPUs, but rather tovelopment of applications and the operation of wirelessthe number of tasks, because CPUs that are in the idle

sensor networks from PCs or PDAs.
U3

state do not consume much electric power. Energy ef-

3. 1

ﬁciency can be categorized into two types. The ﬁrst is

U3 realizes hardware level modularization and dual-

that which is achieved through the improvement of algo-

CPU architecture.

rithms such as MAC or routing schemes. In order to real-

PAVENET divides the functionality of the sensor nodeize this kind of energy eﬃciency, several researchers haveinto four physically separate modules: a power control

proposed a number of energy eﬃcient communication pro-module, a system software module, a communication

tocols 1)∼3) . The second type of energy eﬃciency is thatmodule, and a device module. This hardware level modu-

which is achieved through the improvement of the device

larization enables us to independently replace each func-

structure or materials. Implementing the entire system intion, including power control, wireless communication de-

77

T. SICE Vol.E-S-1 No.1 January 2005
Shared bus connector

MCU PIC18F452 that runs at 20 MHz, and a helical antenna. The PIC18F452 has 8 bit registers, a 1.5 Kbyte
data memory, a 16 Kbyte program memory, and a 256
byte EEPROM. The PIC18F452 controls the TR3001,

System board

Communicationboard

and processes the communication software of the U3
Device board

Power supply
board

SDK. The communication board provides I2 C interface
to the shared bus connector.
The system board consists of IrDA and the same Microchip PIC18F452 as the communication board. The
PIC18F452 runs at 10 MHz and processes the system software of the U3 SDK.
The device board can equip various sensors or actua-

U3

U2-USB

tors, which are controlled by the system board. The device board provides interfaces to the shared bus connector.

Fig. 1 Hardware organization

The interfaces include voltage, which relates informationsuch as temperature, a port that relates 1 bit data, a port

vices, CPU, and sensors. In contrast, conventional sensor
network nodes, such as MICA Mote 4) , only allow replacement of the sensor board.

that controls the device, and an I2 C interface.
We have implemented several device boards, including
a sensor board that has a motion sensor, a temperature

In addition, PAVENET has dual-CPU architecture, al-sensor, and an illuminance sensor, a light board that hasthough most existing testbeds for sensor networks areeight full-color LEDs, and a traﬃc line detection board.
U3 SDK

built using single-CPU architecture. One CPU is for ap-

3. 2

plication tasks, and the other is for communication tasks.

U3 SDK realizes hard real-time transaction support

This dual-CPU architecture provides the following advan-

and network layering.

tages: easy development of applications and communica-

Hard real-time transaction support for application soft-tion protocols, easy evaluation of communication proto-ware is realized by dual-CPU architecture and a sim-cols, and consideration of future hardware developments.

ple priority-based task scheduler. Most existing testbeds

Figure 1 shows each of the four boards, along with U3and U2 − U SB, which are constructed using these fourboards.
U3 is a 50 mm × 50 mm × 50 mm wireless sensor box

are constructed using single-CPU architecture. However,
MAC transactions in wireless communication may requirereal-time transaction support, and these transaction tasks
require computing resources.

Accordingly, applicationthat contains four function boards: a power board, a sys-

software is highly constrained by the MAC transaction

tem board, a communication board, and a device board.

task. In contrast, PAVENET adopts dual-CPU architec-

The boards are connected to each other through a 2.54

ture, thus expanding the capabilities of applications thatmm pitch shared bus connector.
U2 -USB, which consists of a communication board andan I2 C-USB conversion board, is a communication interface to control wireless sensor nodes from PCs or PDAs.
Each board is described below in detail.
The power supply board has three AAA 700 mAh nickel

Communication board

System board

Communication software

System software

Low-layer communication
library

Utility daemon

Application

High-layer
communication
library

metal-hydride batteries and an external DC input forrecharging the batteries. Furthermore, the power supply

Utility daemon

Shared libraryboard supplies 3.0 V to the other boards, provides infor-

Task scheduler

mation regarding battery life, and outputs current to theshared bus connector. The system board can learn the

Rf module

I2C

I2C

remaining battery life as well as the energy consumption
through the shared bus connector.

I2C bus communication

The communication board consists of an RF Monolithics 315 Mhz transceiver TR3001, a Microchip 8 bit

I/O device
library

Fig. 2 U3 SDK

I/O devices
sensors, etc.

78

T. SICE Vol.E-S-1 No.1 2005

may be developed.

Figure 3 shows the network layering and the APIs in

Network layering is needed in order to easily develop

the high-layer communication library. The library trans-

wireless communication functions. In order to realize net-

acts operations such as data aggregation and adhoc rout-work layering, we separate network functions into several

ing. Packets should be routed data centrally and applica-

parts and deﬁne simple interfaces between these parts.

tion speciﬁcally in wireless sensor networks 10) . The ap-

Therefore, PAVENET can enable wireless communication

plication layer provides an interface between the network

functions to be developed more simply than existing soft-

layer and peripheral devices such as sensors and IrDA.

ware frameworks, such as nesC 6) and MANTIS 7) .

The network layer provides a framework for developing

3

U SDK is a software development kit that supports

routing protocols. Users can expand functions, such assystem software and communication software, which arerouting, by describing transaction in event handlers suchprocessed by a system board and a communication board,

as on net recv. The library also provides APIs, which en-

respectively. We use a HI-TECH Software PICC18 com-able us to gain independence from various protocols, such33

piler for the development of U SDK. U SDK is designed

as set net opt or get net opt, that are used when settingwith network layering and support in mind in order to re-the destination addresses or obtaining source addresses.

alize various user demands.

Hence, we can experiment with replacing network proto3

Figure 2 shows the structure of U SDK. Both the sys-

cols through trial and error. The control interface layer

tem software and the communication software have theprovides an interface between network functions and thesame task scheduler and a shared library. The task sched-utility daemon.

uler has lightweight multithreading architecture, and sup-The I/O device library provides a structure that ab-

The hard real-timestracts interfaces such as I2 C, UART, ADC, and IrDA,

transaction can be simply implemented using two-levelby open/read/write functions. Using the abstracted APIspriority interruption of the PIC18 architecture.

of the I/O device library, we can create various portable

ports hard real-time transaction.

High-priority tasks that are bound to highest priority inter-

software modules.

ruption can preempt low-priority tasks. The shared li-

Figure 4 shows how utility daemons in the communica-

brary consists of various APIs for task operations, suchtion software and the system software work. The utility

as add task, trigger task, and resume task, and for de-daemons support management and development of a wire-bugging operations, such as exit u3.

less sensor node cooperating with a utility daemon of the

System softwarecommunication software. The daemons are implemented

The system software consists of a high-layer communi-

using the I/O device library and the shared library. It

cation library, an I/O device library, and a utility daemon.

receives various commands, such as setting a node ad-

Since the components are triggered by interruption anddress or modifying a new program via IrDA on the sys-

the transactions are designed to complete immediately, a

tem board, and accesses network functions via the control

large percentage of the CPUs can be maintained in theinterface layer.

idle state, thus saving a great deal of electric power.
System software
Event Handler

Utility daemon

API

High-layer communication library
on_recv

Application Layer

I2C

Control interface layer

up2appI2C
dw2cmdset_net_opt
on_net_recv

get_net_opt

Network Layer

send
on_net_send

up2netUtility daemon

on_cmd_recv (Control interface layer)
Parameter settings
Extract logs

I2C Bus Layer

dw2iicFig. 3 High-layer communication library

Low-layer communication libraryCommunication Software

Fig. 4 Utility daemon

79

T. SICE Vol.E-S-1 No.1 January 2005

Communication software

U3 , pvnget/pvnset, which can get/set parameters of U3 ,The communication software consists of a low-layer

and pvnping, which is used for conﬁrming the existenceof sensor nodes or for the measurement of packet deliv-

communication library and a utility daemon.
Figure 5 shows the network layering and APIs in theery time. The protocol translation gateway works on PCs

low-layer communication library. The low-layer commu-that equip a U2 -USB and allows users to access sensor

nication library consists of communication functions that

networks through the Internet. The basenode library pro-will be implemented by hardware transaction in the fu-

vides APIs that are arranged from functions of the com-

ture. In PAVENET, these functions are implemented bymand line utility and is used when the user develops ansoftware considering prospective implementation in hard-

application for wireless sensor networks without command

ware, due to software ﬂexibility.

line utility.

A characteristic feature of the low-layer communication

4.

library is support for certain adhoc routing functions, such

Evaluation

as source routing, and ﬂooding, in the simple network

In this section, we describe a number of evaluations oflayer. These simple adhoc routing functions can be real-

PAVENET: a sample code, implementation of two appli-ized in small memory by simple operations. Hence, thesecations using PAVENET, and the simple network per-functions can be implemented by hardware transaction informance evaluation of U3 . We verify the availability of

the future. Transacting an adhoc routing function as a

PAVENET as a development environment and the exper-

part of the communication software reduces the load ofimental environment through these evaluations.

the system software and will accomplish prospective low

4. 1

Sample code

In order to ensure the simplicity of PAVENET, we com-

power consumption in the future.
The utility daemon supports the management and de-pare sample codes that are written using nesC 6) and U3

velopment of a wireless sensor node, in cooperation with

SDK. nesC has been used to implement TinyOS 11) . nesCa utility daemon of the system software. The utility dae-aims to realize a programming language for networked em-

mon provides functions, such as the setting of protocol

bedded systems that represent a new design space for ap-

parameters, the recording of communication logs, using

plication developers. The sample code makes LED blinkthe control interface layer.

every 1 second, which is a very simple operation.

3. 3

In nesC, the user has to implement two diﬀerent source

Basenode software

The basenode software runs on PCs or PDAs to utilize wireless sensor networks and consists of a commandcodes, a conﬁguration ﬁle and a module ﬁle 12) . An example of a conﬁguration ﬁle is as follows:line utility, a protocol translation gateway, and a basen-

configuration Blink{

ode library. The command line utility can be used from}2

the terminal of a PC via system board IrDA or U -USB.
The utility includes pvnload, which loads a program to

implementation {components Main, BlinkM, SingleTimer, LedsC;
Main.StdControl -> Blink.StdControl;

up2iic

I2C

Main.StdControl -> SingleTimer.Timer;
BlinkM.Timer -> SingleTimer.Timer;
dw2netControl interface layer

on_net_recv}

up2neton_mac_recv

BlinkM.Leds -> LedsC;

Simple network layer on_net_send

set_mac_opt get_mac_opt

dw2mac

MAC layer

on_mac_send

set_phy_opt get_phy_opt

dw2phyPhysical layer

on_phy_send

up2macThe following is an example of a module ﬁle:module BlinkM {provides {on_phy_recv

Event handler

interface StdControl;}uses {
interface Timer;API

interface Leds;
Fig. 5 Low-layer communication library}80

T. SICE Vol.E-S-1 No.1 2005

the object that surround us, which enables us to synthe-}

size various services by combining these objects.
implementation {command result_t StdControl.init() {Many service coordination frameworks, such as UPnP
13)

, Jini 14) 15) , and Bluetooth 16) , have been proposed.

call Leds.init();

These frameworks are useful for constructing conventional

return SUCCESS;

or static services because they are designed for conﬁgur-}

ing devices automatically or replacing cable networks withcommand result_t StdControl.start() {wireless networks. These technologies eliminate annoy-

return call Timer.start(TIMER_REPEAT, 1000); ing entwining cables and complex device conﬁgurations.
However, they do not provide a creative environment that}command result_t StdControl.stop() {return call Timer.stop();enables new services to be constructed because they aredesigned while specifying existing services.
In view of this, we are developing a real-space program-}
event result_t Timer.fired() {ming framework called ANtennary THings (ANTH) for

call Leds.redToggle();the ubiquitous computing environment. ANTH attempts

return SUCCESS;

to construct a programmable real-space that enables us
to create desired services by ourselves. ANTH provides a}chip that has three characteristic functions: a user inter-}face function that controls the connection of one device
In nesC, we have to not only learn a new language, butalso to describe these redundant programs.
Next, sample code performs the same operation using
the proposed framework.

to another, a communication function that constructs a
network infrastructure for device cooperation, and a computation function, which drives devices and processes applications. The chip is referred to as an ANTH chip, andvoid user_init(void)an object equipped with an ANTH chip is referred to as{

an ANTH object. We assume, in the future, that ANTH
add_task(sample1, TASK_NO_PRIORITY);

chips are embedded in all everyday objects, such as alarm

trigger_task(sample1);

clocks, lights, and walls. We can create various services
by combining these objects. For example, a motion sen-}sor event bound to an alarm clock bell realizes an instantvoid sample1(void)

security system, which notiﬁes the user of an intruder by{ringing the bell.
set_led0(~(get_led0()));
wait_timer(1000);

Figure 6 shows four implemented ANTH objects: alight, an alarm clock, a button, and a U3 , which is a wire-}
PAVENET enables us to describe arbitrary operations
more simply than nesC. Moreover, PAVANET adopts
the C language, which is one of the most widely usedlanguages in the world, hence many people can utilize
PAVENET more easily than nesC.
4. 2

ANtennary THings

We are developing a real-space programming framework

Alarm

Buttoncalled ANtennary Things (ANTH) using PAVENET.
Through this implementation, we veriﬁed the eﬀectiveness of the hardware level modularization of PAVENET
by implementing a number of devices using the proposed
framework.

Light

U3

In a ubiquitous computing environment, communication and computation functions are embedded in all ofFig. 6 Prototype implementation

81

T. SICE Vol.E-S-1 No.1 January 2005

Sensor Nodes

Sink Nodea) overall figure

Sensor ARF

Sensor D

Traffic LinePC
IrDA

Sensor B

Sensor C

are implemented using U3 . We examined the quality of

A
B
C
D

the direction detection sensor. We placed a sensor node

A
B
C
D

successful detection ratio for detecting a person passingb) detection mechanismon the ceiling of our laboratory. We then measured thein a single direction under the sensor node. The detection
successful ratio was 95%.
In the system board, there exists the very large taskof calculating direction from acquired motion data. First,
the task acquires binary data from four motion sensors every 10 msec. Next, the task removes noises from the seriesc) sensor noded) traffic line viewerof binary data in time axis. Finally, the task extracts a direction based on the timing of the rising edges and fallingFig. 7 Traﬃc line detection systemedges of the four motion sensors and sends the direction
data to a sink node. Although the above task could not be
implemented using MICA and TinyOS 4), 6), 11) , the task

less sensor node. These objects are implemented using

could be implemented using the proposed framework be-

PAVENET, and we have tested some of the operations ofcause of the dual-CPU architecture.

ANTH using these objects 8) . The light has a full color

Figure 7-d shows an example of the behavior of a traf-

LED board as a device board, and a domestic electricﬁc line viewer that was developed using Microsoft Visualboard as a power board. The alarm clock has an alarm

Basic 6.0. The traﬃc line viewer receives direction in-clock board that controls an alarm bell as a device board,

formation from the sink node via a protocol translation

and a battery board as a power board. The light andgateway of PAVENET and plots a traﬃc line.

the alarm clock have diﬀerent device boards and power

4. 4

boards but have the same system board and communica-

In this measurement, we evaluate eﬀectiveness oftion board.
4. 3

Traﬃc line detection system

MAC performance evaluation

PAVENET as an experimental environment for wirelesscommunication protocols.

We have implemented a traﬃc line detection system us-

To this end, we implemented an 802.11-like CSMA pro-ing PAVENET. Through this development, we veriﬁed thetocol as MAC, and a ﬂooding routing protocol to U3 using

eﬀectiveness of the dual-CPU architecture of PAVENET

U3 SDK. The ﬂooding routing protocol broadcasts all re-

because calculating direction from acquired sensor data isceived packets when the packet is received for the ﬁrst

a very large task.

time. In addition, we implemented a performance eval-Traﬃc line information is used for various applications,such as the placement of items in a supermarket, analysis of congestion conditions in an exhibition hall, and theplacement of appliances in an oﬃce.
Figure 7-a shows an outline of the traﬃc line detection

uation tool using the basenode software that works on a
PC.
Figure 8 shows the measurement results for successful
packet receive ratio according to the number of nodes andthe contention window size. The measurement used one

have a direction detection sensor and a sink node that extracts direction information from the sensor nodes.
Figure 7-b shows the mechanism of the direction detection sensor. The direction detection sensor consists of four
spot type motion sensors (Matsushita AMN13111). The
motion sensor has an oval detection area and can detect
infrared radiation generated by human body. The detec-

received reply ratio of sinksystem. This system consists of multiple sensor nodes that
100
90
80
70
60
50
40

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

tion areas of the motion sensors partially overlap. The# of child nodes

direction detection is realized by calculating the diﬀeren-

CW_MIN=7

CW_MIN=15

tial of reactions of them.

CW_MIN=31

CW_MIN=63

Figure 7-c shows a prototype system that is implemented using PAVENET. Sensor nodes and a sink nodeFig. 8 Protocol experiments

982

T. SICE Vol.E-S-1 No.1 2005

sink and a number of sensor nodes, and all of the nodes

by which to realize functions for wireless sensor networks

can communicate with each other. First, the sink broad-in very limited resources 11) . TinyOS is developed using

casts a query to the sensor nodes. Next, the sensor nodes

nesC 6) . nesC has the ability to realize a minimum ofthat received the query send a reply to the sink. The

wireless sensor network technologies in limited comput-

communication load of the sink is very high because all

ing resources, but sacriﬁces some functions, such as hardof the sensor nodes that received the query send a reply

real-time transaction support, that are necessary in order

together and the routing protocol is ﬂooding.

to develop various sensor network technologies. In addi-

Figure 8 shows the measurement results. The ratio istion, although nesC is an extension of the C language,

nearly 100% when communication is peer-to-peer, but theit has a peculiar syntax and so users must learn a new

ratio decreases notably when the contention window size

language.

decreases and the number of nodes increases.

MANTIS, which is a multi-threaded operating system

Users can perform these measurements easily, because

for wireless sensor networking devices, is being developed

PAVENET provides a command line utility that enablesat the University of Colorado 7) . The operating system

us to change network parameters such as the contention

has various functions: a simple cross-platform API, a re-window size of CSMA.

mote shell for debugging and logging, an RF-based ﬁne

5.

grain dynamic reprogramming system, and an original ﬁleRelated studies

system for wireless sensor networks 30) . However, MAN-

Several testbeds for wireless sensor networks already

TIS does not provide a network layering architecture.
Functions to support the development of new wirelessexist.
There are a number of technologies that assume acommunication schemes are very important for immature
sensor network technologies.

single-CPU architecture.
The Particle Computer, which is part of the Smart-

PAVENET and related systems, such as Particle Com-

Its project 5) , is developed at TecO, University of Karl-puter, MICA Mote, TinyOS, and MANTIS, diﬀer withsruhe 17) . The Particle Computer is a platform for rapid

respect to dual-CPU architecture or single- CPU architec-

prototyping of ubiquitous computing environments forture. The single-CPU architecture is unsuitable for use in

adhoc (sensor) networks, wearable computers, home au-

situations in which various elemental functions must be

tomation, and ambient intelligence environments. There-

veriﬁed.

fore, the Particle Computer attaches importance to minia-

BTnode has also been developed as a part of the Smart-turization and the development of applications that are

Its project in ETH Zurich 31) . BTnode is an autonomous

18)

of

wireless communication and computing platform that is

the Smart-Its project is a very creative group, and they

based on Bluetooth radio and a microcontroller. BTnodehave developed many applications for the Particle Com-

serves as a demonstration platform for research in mo-available for immediate use.

puter19)∼26)

The Particle Team. In order to realize these applications, sev-

eral versions of the single-CPU Particle Computer havebile and adhoc connected networks (MANETs) and distributed sensor networks.

been developed, giving priority to miniaturization over

WinsNG sensor nodes were developed by Sensoria Cor-

ﬂexibility. Hence, the Particle Computer design concept

poration, under the DARPA SenseIT program 32) . Win-

diﬀers from that of PAVENET. In addition, although thesNG uses an SH4 CPU, Linux (as an operating system),Particle Computer is designed for an optimized original

GPS, seismic and acoustic sensors, and 802.11 radio.

MAC protocol and a routing protocol, it is not designed

BTnode and WinsNG use commercial radio such as

for easy development of other communication protocols.

Bluetooth and 802.11. This usage of existing radio ap-

MICA Mote 4) and TinyOS 11) , which originated as partproaches releases developers from considering wirelessof the Smart Dust project9)at the University of Califor-

communication details, but the applications that can benia, Berkley, are widely used by researchers as a wirelessdeveloped using the testbeds are limited by the charac-2), 27)∼29). MICA Mote consists

teristics of the wireless radio. For example, Bluetooth re-of oﬀ-the-shelf commercial parts and was developed asquires a long time to establish connections between nodes.

a demonstrative experiment of wireless sensor networks

These restrictions are problematic because nobody canusing several sensor nodes. Therefore, MICA Mote at-predict the assumptions used in future applications oftaches importance to the lowest cost development and has

wireless sensor networks.

sensor network testbeds

single-CPU architecture. TinyOS is tiny operating system

T. SICE Vol.E-S-1 No.1 January 2005

6.

Conclusion

In the present paper, we described the design and implementation of a wireless sensor network testbed called
PAVENET. PAVENET has U3 , U3 SDK, and basenodesoftware. In order to support the development of wirelesssensor network technologies, PAVENET has four characteristic features: hardware level modularization, dualCPU architecture, hard real-time transaction support,
and network layering APIs. We have veriﬁed the applicability of PAVENET by constructing a number of applications, including ANtennary THings, a traﬃc line detection system, and a MAC protocol performance measurement system.
References
1) W. Heinzelman, A. Chandrakasan and H. Balakrishnan:“Energy-Eﬃcient Communication Protocol for WirelessMicrosensor Networks”, Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences(HICSS’00), Maui, Hawaii, USA (2000).
2) W. Ye, J. Heidemann and D. Estrin: “An energy-eﬃcient
MAC protocol for wireless sensor networks”, Proceedings of the 21st Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE
Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM’02),
New York, New York, pp. 1567–1576 (2002).
3) T. van Dam and K. Langendoen: “An Adaptive EnergyEﬃcient MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks”,
Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys’03), Los Angeles, California (2003).
4) J. Hill and D. Culler: “MICA: A Wireless Platform For
Deeply Embedded Networks”, IEEE Micro, Vol. 22, pp.
12–24 (2002).
5) L. E. Homquist, H.-W. Gellersen, G. Kortuem, S. Antifakos, F. Michahelles, B. Schiele, M. Beigl and R. Maze:“Building Intelligent Environments with Smart-Its”, IEEE
Computer Graphics and Applications, Vol. 24, pp. 56–64(2004).
6) D. Gay, P. Levis and R. von Behren: “The nesC Language:
A Holistic Approach to Networked Embedded Systems”,
Proceedings of Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI’03), San Diego, California, ACM, pp. 1–11 (2003).
7) H. A. Abrach, S. Bhatti, J. Carlson, H. Dai, J. Rose,
A. Sheth, B. Shucker, J. Deng and R. Han: “MANTIS OS:
An Embedded Multithreaded Operating System for Wireless Micro Sensor Platforms”, Proceedings of the 2nd ACM
International Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks andApplications (WSNA’03), San Diego, California, pp. 50–59(2003).
8) T. Kashima, S. Saruwatari, H. Morikawa and T. Aoyama:“A Bind Control Model For Real-space Programming in
Ubiquitous Computing Environment”, Adjunct Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Ubiquitous
Computing (UbiComp’04, poster), Nottingham, England(2004).
9) J. M. Kahn, R. H. Katz and K. Pister: “Next Century Challenges: Mobile Networking for Smart Dust”,
Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM/IEEE Internation

83

Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom’99), Seattle, Washington, ACM, pp. 483–492 (1999).
10) D. Estrin, R. Govindan, J. Heidemann and S. Kumar:“Next Century Challenges: Scalable Coordination in Sensor Networks”, Proceedings of the 5th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networks(MobiCom’99), Seattle, Washington, ACM, pp. 263–270(1999).
11) J. Hill, R. Szewczyk, A. Woo, S. Hollar, D. Culler and
K. Pister: “System Architecture Directions for Networked
Sensors”, Proceedings of the 9th International Conferenceon Architectural Support for Programming Languages andOperating Systems (ASPLOS’00), Boston, Massachusetts,
ACM, pp. 93–104 (2000).
12) “TinyOS Tutorial”.
http://webs.cs.berkeley.edu/tos/tinyos-1.x/doc/tutorial/.
13) UPnP Forum: “UPnP Device Architecture 1.0” (2003).
14) Sun Microsystems, Inc.: “Jini Architecture Speciﬁcation”(2001).
15) J. Waldo: “The Jini Architecture for Network-Centric
Computing”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 42, pp.
76–82 (1999).
16) J. C. Haartsen: “The Bluetooth Radio System”, PersonalCommunications, Vol. 7IEEE, pp. 28–36 (2000).
17) M. Beigl, A. Krohn, T. Zimmer, C. Decker and P. Robinson: “AwareCon: Situation Aware Context Communication”, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on
Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp’03), Vol. 2864, Seattle,
Washington, pp. 132–139 (2003).
18) Particle Team: “PARTiCLE WEB SITE”.
http://particle.teco.edu/.
19) T. Zimmer: “Towards a Better Understanding of Context
Attributes”, Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International
Conference on Pervasive Computing and Commnications(PerCom’04), Orland, Florida, IEEE, pp. 23–28 (2004).
20) C. Decker, M. Beigl, A. Krohn, U. Kubach and P. Robinson: “eSeal: A System for Enhanced Electronic Assertionof Authenticity and Integrity of Sealed Items”, Proceedingsof the 2nd International Conference on Pervasive Computing, Linz, Vienna (2004).
21) C. Decker and M. Beigl: “DigiClip: Activating PhysicalDocuments”, Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS’04),
Tokyo, Japan, pp. 388–393 (2004). IWSAWC’04.
22) M. Beigl, A. Krohn, C. Decker, P. R. T. Zimmer,
H. Gellersen and A. Schmidt: “Context Nuggets: A
Smart-Its Game”, Adjunct Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp’03, demo), Seattle, Washington (2003).
23) C. Decker, U. Kubach and M. Beigl: “Revealing the RetailBlack Box by Interaction Sensing”, Proceedings of the 23th
International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS’03), Providence, Rhode Island (2003). IWSAWC’03.
24) P. Robinson and M. Beigl: “Trust Context Spaces: An Infrastructure for Pervasive Security in Context-Aware Environments”, Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Security in Pervasive Computing (SPC’03), Boppard, Germany (2003).
25) M. Beigl, P. Robinson, T. Zimmer and C. Decker: “Teaching a practical Ubicomp Course with Smart-Its”, Adjuct
Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp’02), Goteborg, Sweden, pp.
43–44 (2002).
26) L. E. Holmquist, F. Mattern, B. Schiele, P. Alahuhta,

84

T. SICE Vol.E-S-1 No.1 2005

M. Beigl and H.-W. Gellersen: “Smart-Its Friends: A
Technique for Users to Easily Establish Connections between Smart Artefacts”, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp’01), Atlanta, Georgia, pp. 116–122 (2001).
27) Y. Kawahara, T. Hayashi, H. Tamura, H. Morikawa andT. Aoyama: “A Context-Aware Content Delivery Service
Using Oﬀ-the-shelf Sensors”, Proceedings of the 2nd International Confernce on Mobile Systems, Applications, andServices (Mobisys’04, Poster Presentation), Boston, Massachusetts (2004).
28) R. Suzuki, K. Makimura, H. Saito and Y. Tobe: “Prototype of a Sensor Network with Moving Nodes”, Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Networked Sensing Systems (INSS’04), Tokyo, Japan (2004).
29) A. Mainwaring, J. Polastre, R. Szewczyk, D. Culler and
J. Anderson: “Wireless Sensor Networks for Habitat
Monitoring”, Proceedings of the 1st ACM International
Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Applications(WSNA’02), Atlanta, Georgia (2002).
30) H. Dai, M. Neufeld and R. Han: “ELF: An Eﬃcient LogStructured Flash File System for Wireless Micro Sensor
Nodes”, Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys’04), Baltimore,
Maryland (2004).
31) J. Beutel, O. Kasten, F. Mattern, K. Römer, F. Siegemund
and L. Thiele: “Prototyping Wireless Sensor Network Applications with BTnodes”, Proceedings of the 1st European Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks (EWSN’04),
Berlin, Germany, pp. 323–338 (2004).
32) G. J. Pottie and W. J. Kaiser: “Wireless Integrated Network Sensors”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 43, pp.
51–58 (2000).

Shunsuke SARUWATARIHe received the B.S. degrees in Computer Science from the University of ElectroCommunications, and M.S. degree in Frontier
Informatics from the University of Tokyo. He
is currently a Ph.D. student of the Department of Frontier Informatics at the Universityof Tokyo. His research interests are in the areaof computer networks, distributed computing,wireless networks, embedded computer, andwireless sensor networks. He is a member of
IEICE, and IPSJ.

Masateru MINAMI
He received B.E. and M.E. from Shibaura Institute of Technology, and Dr. Eng. from the
University of Tokyo in 1996, 1998 and 2001 respectively. He is currently an assistant professor at Shibaura Institute of Technology. His
research interests include location systems andsensor networks for ubiquitous computing.

Hiroyuki MORIKAWA
He received the B.E., M.E., and Dr. Eng.
degrees in Electrical Engineering from the University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, in 1987, 1989,
and 1992, respectively. He is currently an Associate Professor of the Department of Frontier
Informatics at the University of Tokyo. From1997 to 1998, he stayed in Columbia University as a visiting research associate. His research interests are in the area of computer networks, distributed computing, mobile computing, wireless networks, and network services.
He served as Editor of Transactions of Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers (IEICE) and on the technical program committees of IEEE/ACM conferences and workshops. He is a member of IEEE,
ACM, ISOC, IPSJ, and ITE.

Tomonori AOYAMAHe received the B.E., M.E. and Dr. Eng.
from the Univ. of Tokyo in 1967, 1969, and1991 respectively. Since he joined NTT in
1969, he was engaged in R & D on various communication networks and systems in the NTT
Labs. He stayed in MIT as a visiting scientist
in 1973-1974. In 1994 he was appointed to Director of NTT Opto-Electronics Laboratories,
and then in 1995 he became Director of NTT
Optical Network Systems Labs. In 1997 he left
NTT, and joined the University of Tokyo, andhe is now Professor in the Department of Information and Communication Engineering there.
He is IEEE Fellow. He is past President of IEICE Communication Society. He is co-author
or co-editor of several books for digital signal
processing, ATM broadband networks and optical ﬁber transmission systems.

Takuya KASHIMAHe received the B.E. and M.E. degrees inInformation and Communication Engineeringfrom the University of Tokyo. He is currently
working at KDDI Corporation.

Reprinted from Trans. of the SICE
Vol. E-S-1 No. 1 74/84 2005