See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324943540

Analysis of Energy Efficient Hierarchical Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor

Networks

Thesis · May 2012

CITATIONS READS

0 215

3 authors, including:

Usman Nazir Nadeem Javaid

COMSATS University Islamabad COMSATS University Islamabad
10 PUBLICATIONS   143 CITATIONS    1,273 PUBLICATIONS   10,422 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Power Management in smart grid of residential consumers View project

Energy management in smart grid View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nadeem Javaid on 04 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Analysis of Energy Efficient Hierarchical Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks

Usman Nazir and M. Usman Saeed

A Undergraduate Final Year Project Report submitted to the Department of

ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Bachelor of Science in Electrical (Telecommunication) Engineering

Dr. Nadeem Javaid, Advisor

Department of Electrical Engineering

COMSATS INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, ISLAMABAD

May 2012

Copyright © 2012 Usman Nazir and M. Usman Saeed

All Rights Reserved

 ABSTRACT

Analysis of Energy Efficient Hierarchical Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks

Usman Nazir and M. Usman Saeed

Department of ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
Bachelor of Science in Electrical (Telecommunication) Engineering

An energy efficient routing protocol is the major concern for researcher in the area of WSNs.
In our thesis we present some energy efficient hierarchal routing protocols, developed from con-
ventional LEACH routing protocol. Main focus of our study is to describe, how these extended
routing protocols work in order to increase the life time and how quality of routing protocol is im-
proved for the WSNs. Furthermore our thesis also highlights some of the issues faced by LEACH
and also explains how these issues are tackled by extended versions of LEACH. We analytically
compare the features and performance issues of each hierarchal routing protocol. We also simu-
lated selected routing protocols of our study to elaborate the enhancement achieved by improved
routing protocols.

Keywords: Energy Efficient, Routing, Protocol, Hierarchical, WSNs, LEACH, Performance issues
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First of all we would like to thank Almighty ALLAH, Who has bestowed countless blessings
on us and made us capable of completing our project successfully. Every human needs inspiration

and motivation from a charismatic personality and for this very purpose especially we would like

to thank our Supervisor: Dr. Nadeem Javaid for his kindness, magnanimity, whole hearted support

and untiring efforts in making the completion of this project a reality. We are very grateful to our

family, who encouraged and supported us throughout our project work. Their blessings and sincere

wishes have always been a constant source and encouragement and strength for us.
Contents

Table of Contents vii

List of Figures ix

1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Wireless Sensor Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Sensor Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2.1 Components of WSN Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Applications of WSNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3.1 Military Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3.2 Home Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3.3 Health Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3.4 Environmental Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4 Design principle of WSN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4.1 Homogeneous Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4.2 Heterogeneous Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4.3 Hybrid Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.5 Limitations for WSN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.5.1 Routing Challenges in WSNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.6 Routing in WSNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.6.1 Flat Network routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.6.2 Hierarchical routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1.6.3 Location Based Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1.6.4 Comparison of Different Routing Protocols in WSNs . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.7 Project Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.8 Simulation Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.9 Project Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

2 HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS 17

2.0.1 LEACH (Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy) . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.0.2 LEACH-Centralized (LEACH-C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.0.3 Solar-aware Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy(sLEACH) . . . . 22

vii
viii CONTENTS

2.0.4 Multi-hop LEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

2.0.5 Mobile-LEACH (M-LEACH) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.0.6 LEACH-selective cluster (LEACH-SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

3 Analytical Comparison of Hierarchical Routing Protocols 35

3.1 Energy consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.2 Energy Efficiency of Clustering Routing Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.3 Comparison of LEACH and its modified routing protocols in WSNs . . . . . . . . 42

4 Simulation Results 47

5 Conclusions and Future Work 55

Bibliography 57

Index 59
List of Figures

1.1 Wireless Sensor Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.2 Schematic diagram of sensor node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.3 Homing with WSNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.4 Difference b/w Flat Network Routing and Hierarchical Routing . . . . . . . . . . . 14

1.5 Comparison of Different Routing Protocols in WSNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

2.1 Clusters and CHs formation in Hierarchical Routing Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2.2 LEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

2.3 Set-up and Steady State phase in LEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

2.4 Flow chart of LEACH Routing protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

2.5 Flow chart of LEACH-Centralized routing protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

2.6 Flow chart of solar-aware Centralized LEACH routing protocol . . . . . . . . . . . 29

2.7 Flow chart of solar-aware Distributed LEACH routing protocol . . . . . . . . . . 30

2.8 Multi-hopLEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

2.9 Flow chart of Multi-hopLEACH routing protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

2.10 Flow chart of M-LEACH routing protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

2.11 Flow chart of LEACH-SC routing protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

3.1 Radio Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

ix
x LIST OF FIGURES

3.2 Linear Network Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

4.1 Dead Nodes/round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

4.2 Allive Nodes/round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

4.3 DataToBS/round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

4.4 DataToCH/round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

4.5 CHs/round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Wireless Sensor Network

A Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) is composed of distributed independent sensors to monitor

physical conditions, in the area surrounding them, such as pressure, sound, heat, air pollution

etc. and pass their data to main location by cooperative capabilities. The measurements taken by
these sensors are transformed into signals, these signals are sent to processing unit to reveal few

characteristics about that area surrounding by sensor nodes. WSN is shown in fig 1.1.

1.2 Sensor Node

"It is a device which is used to measure the physical condition of an environment." Every Sensor

Node perform sensing, processing, gathering sensory information, transmission and communica-

tion.Schematic diagram of sensor node is shown in fig 1.2.

1
2 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

Figure 1.1 Wireless Sensor Network

1.2.1 Components of WSN Node

Power Source

To perform the operations i.e. sensing, gathering information, processing and communication;

Sensor Node consumes power.

External Memory

Storage data which is coming from other nodes or sensors in stored in RAM of Sensor Node and

program memory of Sensor Node is ROM.

1.2 Sensor Node 3

Figure 1.2 Schematic diagram of sensor node

Transceiver

Transceiver has functionality of both transmitter and receiver. It is used for transmitting and receiv-

ing of radio waves, when data comes to transmitter it converts bit stream of data into radio waves

and then transmit; similarly when receiver receives radio waves it demodulate the radio signal to

get required information from data.

Sensor

Sensors are hardware gadgets that produce measureable response to change in the parameter be-

ing monitored. This response is converted into digital format and sent to processor for further

processing.
4 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

Processor

Processor is a controller of Sensor Node; it is also CPU of a node. As from its name it shows it is

used for processing data, which node receives from sensors or other nodes, it is also used to control
the functionality of other components in Sensor Node.

1.3 Applications of WSNs

WSNs have numerous applications some of important applications are as follows:

1.3.1 Military Applications

The essential part of military surveillance, communications and targeting systems is WSN. Sensors

are deployed for

-> Battlefield Surveillance

-> Battle Damage Assessment

-> Monitoring friendly forces

-> Detection reconnaissance of chemical or nuclear attack

1.3.2 Home Applications

WSNs have step into our normal life, Sensor are deployed to open the door, boil water or eggs,

switch on the light or TV (for this purpose we deploy pressure sensors under the cushion or bed

that automatically switch on /off light or TV), avoid theft cases and so many more applications like

this some are shown in Fig 1.3.

1.3 Applications of WSNs 5

Figure 1.3 Homing with WSNs

1.3.3 Health Application

In health care area, Modern hospitals nowadays using WSNs to

-> Monitor patient psychological data

-> Control drug administration track

-> Monitor doctors and patients and inside a hospital

-> Unconsciousness detection

-> Fall detection

-> Dietary and exercise monitoring

6 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

1.3.4 Environmental Applications

In agriculture research and fire detection WSNs are widely used. For this purpose sensors are

deployed to every plant for making sure that it gets right watering and right nutrients. To check the
pollution in our environment Sensor nodes are also used.

1.4 Design principle of WSN

There are three kinds of network which are usually generated by nodes in WSNs.

1.4.1 Homogeneous Environment

In this scenario all nodes of network should have same energy.

1.4.2 Heterogeneous Environment

In this scenario all nodes of WSN should have different energy.

1.4.3 Hybrid Environment

In this environment nodes of specific region have same energy and nodes of other region have

different energy.

1.5 Limitations for WSN

Routing is main challenge faced by WSNs. Routing is complicated in WSN due to dynamic

nature of nodes, limited battery life, computational overhead, no conventional addressing scheme,

self-organization and limited transmission range of Sensor nodes [2], [5], and [6]. As sensors
1.5 Limitations for WSN 7

possess limited battery and usually battery cannot be replaced and recharged due to area of their
deployment, so the network lifetime depends upon sensors initial battery capacity. A Careful

management of resources is needed to increase the life span of the WSNs. Quality of routing

protocols depends upon the amount of data (actual data signal) successfully received by BS from

sensors nodes deployed in the network area.

1.5.1 Routing Challenges in WSNs

Despite the numerous applications of sensor networks, these networks have several limitations, in-

cluding limited energy supply, limited computing power, and limited bandwidth of wireless links
connecting sensor nodes. One of the main goals of sensor network design is to achieve data com-

munication, while trying to prolong the lifetime of the network and prevent degradation of con-

nectivity using techniques of aggressive energy management. The design of routing protocols in

sensor networks is influenced by many factors difficult. These factors must be overcome before

effective communication can be achieved in sensor networks. In what follows, we summarize

some of the challenges of routing and design problems that affect the process of routing in sensor
networks.

Node Deployment

Node in the deployment of sensor networks depends on the application and can be either manual

(deterministic) or random. In a manual deployment, the sensors are manually placed and data

is routed through predetermined paths. However, in the random node deployment, the sensor

nodes are scattered randomly, creating an ad hoc routing infrastructure. If the resulting distribu-
tion of nodes is not uniform, optimal clustering becomes necessary for connectivity and allow the

exploitation of energy-efficient network. Intersensor communication is normally in short transmis-

sion ranges due to limitations of energy and bandwidth. Therefore, it is likely that a route will
8 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

consist of multiple wireless hops.

Energy consumption without losing accuracy

Sensor nodes can deplete their limited stock of energy calculations and transmit information in a

wireless environment. As such, conservation of energy forms of communication and computation

are essential. Lifetime of the sensor node shows a strong dependence on the life of the battery

[5]. In a multihop WSN, each node has a dual role as a transmitter of data and data router. The

failure of some sensor nodes due to power failure can cause significant topological changes, and
may require rerouting of packets and network reorganization.

Data reporting method

Data communication in sensor networks depends on the application and also depends on the criti-

cality of time data. Data communication can be classified as either the power stroke, event driven,

query engine, or a hybrid of all these methods. The liability method of delivery is suitable for

applications that require periodic monitoring of data. As such, sensor nodes periodically switch on
their sensors and transmitters, sense the environment, and transmit the data of interest at constant

time intervals periodicals. In the methods and event-driven application-oriented, sensor nodes re-

act immediately to sudden and drastic changes in the value of an attribute detected due to the

occurrence of a certain event, or respond to a request generated by the BS or another node in the

network. As such, they are well suited for time critical applications. A combination of the above

methods is also possible. The routing protocol is strongly influenced by the method of reporting
data in terms of energy consumption and the route calculation.
1.5 Limitations for WSN 9

Node/link heterogeneity

In many studies, all sensor nodes were assumed to be homogeneous (i.e., have equal capacity

in terms of computation, communication, and power). However, depending on the application a

sensor node can have a different role or capability. The existence of a heterogeneous set of sensors

raises many technical issues related to data routing. For example, some applications might require a

diverse mixture of sensors for monitoring temperature, pressure, and humidity of the surrounding

environment, detecting motion via acoustic signatures, and capturing images or video tracking

of moving objects. Either these special sensors can be deployed independently or the different

functionalities can be included in the same sensor nodes. Even data reading and reporting can be
generated from these sensors at different rates, subject to diverse QoS constraints, and can follow

multiple data reporting models. For example, hierarchical protocols designate a cluster head node

different from the normal sensors. These cluster heads can be chosen from the deployed sensors

or be more powerful than other sensor nodes in terms of energy, bandwidth, and memory. Hence,

the burden of transmission to the BS is handled by the set of cluster heads.

Fault tolerance

Some sensor nodes may fail or be blocked due to lack of power, physical damage, or environ-

mental interference. The failure of sensor nodes should not affect the overall task of the sensor

network. If many nodes fail, medium access control (MAC) and routing protocols must accom-

modate formation of new links and routes to the data collection BSs. This may require actively

adjusting transmit powers and signaling rates on the existing links to reduce energy consumption,

or rerouting packets through regions of the network where more energy is available. Therefore,
multiple levels of redundancy may be needed in a fault-tolerant sensor network.
10 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

Scalability

The number of sensor nodes deployed in the detection zone may be of the order of hundreds or

thousands or more. Any routing scheme must be able to work with this large number of sensor
nodes. In addition, sensor network routing protocols must be scalable enough to respond to events

in the environment. Until an event occurs, most sensors can remain in the sleep state, with data

from other sensors with a few coarse quality.

Network dynamics

In many studies, the sensor nodes are assumed fixed. However, in many applications both the

BS and sensor nodes can be mobile [6]. As such, routing messages to and from mobile nodes is
more difficult because the directional stability and topology become important issues in addition

to energy, bandwidth, and so on. Moreover, the phenomenon may be mobile (eg, a target detection

/ tracking applications). On the other hand, detect events still allows the network to work in a

reactive mode (ie, generating traffic when reporting), while the dynamic events in most applications

require periodic reports to the BS.

Transmission media

In a network of sensors multi-hop, the communication nodes are connected by a wireless medium.

The traditional problems associated with a wireless channel (eg fading, high error rate) may also

affect the operation of the sensor network. In general, the required bandwidth sensor data is low,

the range of 1-100 kb / s. On the transmission media is the design of MAC. An approach to de-

signing MAC for sensor networks is to use time division multiple access (TDMA)-based protocols
that conserve more energy than contention-based protocols such as Carrier Sense Multiple Access

(CDMA) (eg, IEEE 802.11). Bluetooth technology [7] can also be used.
1.5 Limitations for WSN 11

Connectivity

High density of nodes in sensor networks which prevents them from being completely isolated

from each other. Therefore, the sensor nodes are supposed to be very connected. This, however,
cannot prevent the network topology to be variable and the size of the network to shrink due to

failures of sensor nodes. In addition, connectivity depends on the random distribution of nodes

eventually.

Coverage

In networks of sensors, each sensor obtains a certain point of view of the environment. A sensor

point of view given the environment is limited in both scope and accuracy, it can only cover a lim-
ited area of the physical environment. Therefore, the coverage area is also an important parameter

in the design of sensor networks.

Data aggregation

As the sensor nodes can generate significant amounts of redundant data, similar packets from

multiple nodes can be aggregated to reduce the number of transmissions. Data aggregation is the
combination of data from different sources according to some aggregation function (eg, removing

duplicate, minima, maxima, and average). This technique was used to achieve energy efficiency

and optimization of data transfer in a number of routing protocols. Signal processing methods can

also be used for data aggregation. In this case it is referred to as data fusion where a node is capable

of producing an output signal by using more precise techniques such as beamforming to combine

the incoming signals and reduce noise in these signals.

12 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

Quality of service

In certain applications, the data within a specified period from the moment it is perceived to be

delivered, or it will be useless. Therefore, for data transmission to limit the delay time for appli-
cations is another condition. Therefore, energy aware routing protocol is necessary to capture this

need.

1.6 Routing in WSNs

Different kinds of Routing in WSNs is shown below. Our thesis is based upon Hierarchical Rout-

ing.

1. Flat Network Routing

2. Hierarchical Routing

3. Location Based Routing

1.6.1 Flat Network routing

The first category of routing protocols is the (multihop) FRPs. In flat networks, each node (sensor

nodes typically plays role of collaboration to the detection task. Due to the large number of these

nodes, it is not possible to assign a global identifier at each node. This consideration led to cen-

tered on the routing data, where the BS sends requests and to certain regions of the expected data

sensors in the selected regions. Since data is requested through queries, attribute-based naming is
necessary to clarify data properties. Data-centric routing saves energy through data bargaining and

the elimination of redundant data.

1.6 Routing in WSNs 13

1.6.2 Hierarchical routing

Hierarchical or cluster based routing methods, originally proposed in wired networks, are well

known techniques with special advantages related to scalability and effective communication. As
such, the concept of hierarchical routing is also used to perform energy efficiency in sensor net-

works routing. In hierarchical structure architecture, higher energy nodes can be used to process

and send the information, while low energy nodes can be used to perform the detection in the

vicinity of the target. The creation clusters and assigning special tasks to cluster heads can greatly

contribute to the overall system scalability, lifetime, and energy efficiency. Hierarchical routing

is an effective way to reduce energy consumption in a cluster, perform aggregation and fusion in
order to reduce the number of messages forwarded to the BS. Hierarchical routing is mainly two-

layer routing where one layer is used to select the cluster heads and the other for routing. However,

most techniques in this category are not on the routing, but rather who and when to send or pro-

cess global information, channel assignment, and so the, which can be orthogonal to the multi hop

routing function. Comparison of Flat Network Routing and Hierarchical Routing is given in figure

1.5.[1]

1.6.3 Location Based Routing

In this kind of routing, sensor nodes are processed by means of their locations. The distance

between neighbouring nodes can be estimated on the basis of intensities of the incoming signal.

The relative coordinates can be obtained by exchange information between neighbouring nodes.

Otherwise, the node locations is available directly by contacting a satellite using GPS if nodes are

equipped a small low power GPS receiver. To save energy, some plans require location-based that
nodes must go to sleep if there is no activity. More energy savings can be achieved by having as

many nodes of the network in sleeping as possible.

14 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

Figure 1.4 Difference b/w Flat Network Routing and Hierarchical Routing

1.6.4 Comparison of Different Routing Protocols in WSNs

We summarize recent results on data routing in Sensor networks in figure 1.6 [5]. The table shows

how different routing protocols under different categories and also compares different routing tech-

niques according to many parameters.

1.7 Project Methodology

In our thesis we are working only Hierarchical clustering based routing protocols. The category

of HCRPs is providing maximum EERPs [5], [6]. Number of HCRP has been proposed. LEACH
(Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy) is acknowledged as a basic energy efficient HCRP.

Many protocols have been derived from LEACH with some modifications and applying advance
1.7 Project Methodology 15

Figure 1.5 Comparison of Different Routing Protocols in WSNs

routing techniques. Our thesis discuses and compares few HCRPs LEACH, LEACH-C, solar-

aware LEACH (sLEACH), Multi-Hop LEACH, M-LEACH and LEACH-SC. These all are energy

efficient and well-organized routing protocols and provide quality enhancement to LEACH.
16 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

1.8 Simulation Software

The behaviour of WSNs, in the absence of actual network, is predicted by a software program
also called Network Simulator. Multiple software, MATLAB, Ns-2-3, Netsim, Omnet, Opnet and

many others, are available for simulations of different scenarios in WSNs. We are using MATLAB

for the simulation of the different protocols.

1.9 Project Overview

Numerous protocols have been proposed for the WSNs to reduce the energy consumption. In every

protocol different technique is used to minimize power consumption, main issue of WSNs. We are

using Homogeneous Environment. We discuss the working of LEACH, LEACH-C, sLEACH,

Multi-hopLEACH, M-LEACH and LEACH-SC with all necessary details. After that we compare
the features of these selected hierarchical cluster based routing protocols. Analytical comparison

is given to elaborate the energy efficiency of routing protocols. Simulation results are discussed.

At the end we conclude our comprehensive analysis.

Chapter 2

HIERARCHICAL ROUTING
PROTOCOLS

In HCRPs whole network nodes are divided into multiple clusters. One node in each cluster plays

leading rule. CHs are the only nodes that can communicate to BS in clustering routing protocols.

This significantly reduces the longer distance transmission overhead of normal nodes because nor-

mal nodes have to transmit to CHs only [14], [1], [2], [3], [5], [7], [11], [12], [15]. Working of
selected LEACH and others extended from LEACH are discussed in this chapter, Figure 2.1 shows

basic Clusters and CHs formation in HCRPs.

2.0.1 LEACH (Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy)

LEACH is one of the earliest HCRPs used for WSNs to increase the life span of network. LEACH

performs self-organizing and re-clustering functions for every round [1]. Sensor nodes organize

themselves into clusters in LEACH routing protocol. In every cluster one of the Wireless Sensor
Nodes acts as CH and remaining Sensor nodes act as member nodes of that cluster. Only CHs

can directly communicate to sink and member nodes use CH as intermediate router in case of

17
18 Chapter 2 HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS

Figure 2.1 Clusters and CHs formation in Hierarchical Routing Protocols

communication to sink. CHs collect the data from all the nodes, aggregate the data and route all

meaningful compressed information to Sink. Because of these additional responsibilities, CH dis-

sipates more energy and if it remains CH permanently it will die quickly as happened in case of

static clustering. LEACH tackles this problem by randomized rotation of CH to save the battery

of individual node [1], [2]. In these ways LEACH maximize life time of network nodes and also

reduce the energy dissipation by compressing the date before transmitting to BS.

LEACH routing protocol operations based on rounds, where each round normally consists of

two phases. First is setup phase and second is steady state phase. In setup phase CHs and clusters

are created. All nodes are managed by using multiple clusters. Some nodes elect themselves as a

CHs independently from other nodes. These nodes elect themselves on behalf Suggested percent-
age P and its previous record as CH. Nodes which were not CHs in previous 1/p rounds generate

a number between 0 to 1 and if it is less then threshold T(n) then nodes become CH. Threshold

value is set through this formula.

 19

Base Station

Clusre-head node

Non-Cluster-head node

Figure 2.2 LEACH


P
if n ∈ G


1−P∗(rmod P1 )
T (n) = (2.1)
 0

otherwise

Where G is set of nodes that have not been selected as CHs in previous 1/p rounds, P is sug-

gested percentage of CH, r is current round. If nodes become CHs in current round, these nodes

will be CHs after next 1/p rounds [1], [2], [3]. This indicates that every node will serve as a CH

equally and energy dissipation will be uniform throughout the network. Elected CHs broadcast

their status using CSMA MAC protocol. Non-CH nodes will select their CH comparing RSSI of
multiple CHs, from where nodes receive advertisements messages. All CHs will create TDMA
20 Chapter 2 HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS

schedule for their associated members in the cluster.

Setup phase and Steady state are shown in figure 2.3 [3]. Steady state phase starts when clusters

have been created. In this phase nodes communicate to CH during allocated time slots otherwise

nodes keep sleeping. Due to this attribute LEACH minimizes energy dissipation and extends bat-

tery span of all individual nodes. When data from all nodes of cluster have been received to CH. It

will aggregate, compress and transmit to sink. The steady state phase is longer than setup phase.

Figure 2.3 Set-up and Steady State phase in LEACH

Figure 2.2 shows the LEACH basic communication hierarchy. Figure 2.4 shows the flow chart

of LEACH. This detail flow chart is extension of a flow chart discuss in [3]. LEACH reduces this

energy dissipation with the help of following feature.

1. Reducing the number of transmission to sink using CH

2. Reducing the date to be transmit through compression technique

3. LEACH Increases the life time of all nodes through randomizes rotation being as CH [1], [2],

[3].

4. LEACH allows non-CH nodes to keep sleeping except specific time duration

5. In LEACH routing protocol nodes die randomly and dynamic clustering enhance network life-

time
 21

6. LEACH routing protocol makes WSN scalable and robust

2.0.2 LEACH-Centralized (LEACH-C)

Although Conventional LEACH has many advantages like energy maximizing of network nodes

and also provides limited network scalability but it does not guarantee the effective location and

optimal number of CHs during all rounds [1], [2], [3],[4], [6], [7]. It is due to its distributed algo-

rithm of clustering creation. So setup phase of LEACH needs to be modified for effective cluster
formation. For this purpose LEACH-centralized has been proposed by Heinzelman and her co-

authors[3].

In LEACH-Centralized during setup phase all nodes send their energy status, node ID and location

information to BS[2], [3], [4], [5]. BS specifies CHs and non-CH nodes using Central Control

algorithm. Using Central control algorithm BS compares the energy of all nodes with specific

average energy level [6]. If energy of some nodes is less than the average energy, BS decides these
nodes as member nodes. BS selects optimal number of CHs from nodes having energy above than

average energy level and broadcast the node IDs of selected CHs to all networks nodes. BS tries to

minimize the distance between member nodes and CHs. In this way LEACH-C reduces the energy

dissipation of member nodes as they have to transmit to CH at short distance. This central control

algorithm produces much better clustering than distributed control algorithm. LEACH-Centralized

use some necessary assumptions that each node can compute its energy, knows its location and can
transmit this information to CH no matter how long the BS is far away from node. Because nodes

can adapt multiple transmission power level and can vary its range of communication for intra-

cluster communication and inter-cluster communication [2].

Steady state phase process of LEACH-Centralized is similar to LEACH but in LEACH-C en-
22 Chapter 2 HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS

hances the number of packets received at BS increases due to optimal number of CHs and their
effective location with respect to their non-CH nodes. LEACH-C is slightly better than LEACH

but it has some drawbacks also. In setup phase all nodes have to send their information to BS.

This dissipates the additional energy of all nodes for every round. BS selects most suitable CHs

and broadcast their node IDs to all nodes. Normal nodes also dissipate energy unnecessarily in

matching their node IDs to CHs Node IDs. It is the main disadvantage of LEACH-C. Flow chart of

LEACH-C is shown in figure 2.5. From flow chart it is described that only setup phase is different
from LEACH and remaining steady state phase is similar to steady state phase of LEACH.

2.0.3 Solar-aware Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy(sLEACH)

Energy harvesting is essential incase of some specific applications offered by WSN, especially

when sensor nodes are placed in non-accessible areas like battlefield and forest [9]. For such kind

of applications solar-ware LEACH (sLEACH) has been proposed by authors [9]in which lifetime

of the WSN has been improved through solar cell installation over nodes. In sLEACH some nodes
are facilitated by solar power and these nodes will act as CHs more often depending upon their

solar status. Both LEACH and LEACH-C are extended to sLEACH.

Solar-aware Centralized LEACH

In solar-aware Centralized LEACH CHs are selected by BS with help of improved Central control

algorithm. BS normally select solar powered nodes as CHs because these nodes have maximum

residual energy. Authors improve the conventional CH selecting algorithm used in LEACH-C [2],
[3]. In sLEACH nodes transmit their solar status to BS along with energy and nodes with higher

energy are selected as CHs. Performance of sensor network increases when number of solar-aware

nodes are increase. Sensor network lifetime also depends upon the sunDuration. It is the time

when energy is harvested. If sunDuration is smaller CH handover is also performed in sLEACH

 23

[9]. If node serving as CH is running on battery and other node in same cluster sends data with flag,
denoting that its solar power is increased this node will become CH in place of first serving CH.

This new CH is selected during steady state phase, that also enhance the lifetime of the network

nodes.Flow chart of solar-aware Centralized LEACH is shown in figure 2.6. Flow chart provide

the complete working mechanism of solar-aware Centralized LEACH routing protocol.

Solar-aware Distributed LEACH

In Solar-aware Distributed LEACH a distributed algorithm is used for clustering process. In setup

phase CHs choosing preference is given to solar-driven nodes. Initially probability for solar-driven

nodes is higher than battery-driven nodes. Equation 1 is needed to be changed to increase the
probability of solar-driven nodes. This can be achieved by multiplying a factor sf (n) to right side

of the equation 2.2.

p
T (n) = s f (n) × cHeads
(2.2)
1 − ( numNodes )

Where sf(n) is equal to 4 for solar-driven nodes, sf(n) is equal to 1/4 for battery driven nodes. P

is the percentage of optimal CHs. The cHeads is number of CHs since the start of last meta round.

The numNodes is total number of nodes [8], [9].

Remaining setup phase part of solar-aware Distributed LEACH is like conventional LEACH. Like

solar-aware Centralized LEACH, in Steady state phase CH handover can be performed. If solar-
power is added in non-CH node and CH is battery driven node then CH handover is executed.

Efficiency of sLEACH-Distributed can be maximize by adding more solar-driven nodes. Flow

chart of solar-aware Distribute LEACH is shown in figure 2.7.As shown in Flow chart setup phase

is distributed and probabilistic base like LEACH but in this case probability of solar-driven nodes
24 Chapter 2 HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS

is kept higher. These solar-driven nodes can become CH again in next round also if its probability
is still higher than other nodes.

2.0.4 Multi-hop LEACH

When the network diameter is increased beyond certain level, distance between CH and BS is

increased enormously. This scenario is not suitable for LEACH routing protocol [11] in which

BS is at single-hop to CH. In this case energy dissipation of CH is not affordable. To address

this problem Multi-hop LEACH is proposed in [12] as shown in figure 2.8. Multi-hop LEACH
is another extension of LEACH routing protocol to increase energy efficiency of the WSN [11],

[12], [13]. Multi-hop LEACH is also complete distributed clustering based routing protocol. Like

LEACH, in Multi-HopLEACH some nodes elect themselves as CHs and other nodes associate

themselves with elected CHs to complete clustering formation in setup phase.

In steady state phase CHs collect data from all nodes of their clusters and transmit data directly
or through other CHs to BS after aggregation. Multi-Hop LEACH allows two types of communi-

cation operations. These are inter-cluster communication and intra-cluster communication.

In Multi-hop inter-cluster communication, when whole network is divided into multiple clus-

ters each cluster has one CH, this CH is responsible for communication for all nodes in the cluster;

CH receives data from all nodes at single-hop and aggregate and transmit directly to sink or through

intermediate CHs. In Multi-hop inter-cluster communication when distance between CH and BS

is large then CH use intermediate CH to communicate to BS. Figure 2.8 describes Multi-Hop

LEACH communication architecture. Randomized rotation of CH is similar to LEACH. Multi-

Hop LEACH selects best path with minimum energy consuming route. An other criteria of se-

lecting intermediate CH is to keep the overall distance towards BS minimum because distance is

directly proportional to energy dissipation. So route with minimum hop-count between source CH

and BS is selected. Flow chart of Mult-hop LEACH is shown in Figure 2.9. Flow chart indicates
 25

that Multi-hop LEACH is very much similar to LEACH, but Multi-hop LEACH is allowing inter-
cluster communication also.

2.0.5 Mobile-LEACH (M-LEACH)

LEACH considers all nodes are homogeneous with respect to energy which is not realistic ap-

proach. In particular round uneven nodes are attached to multiple CH; in this case CH with large

number of member nodes will drain its energy as compare to CH with smaller number of associ-
ated member nodes. Furthermore mobility support is another issue with LEACH routing protocol,

to mitigate these issues, M-LEACH is proposed in [16].

M-LEACH allows mobility for nodes during the setup and steady state phase. M-LEACH also

considers remaining energy of the nodes in selection of CHs. Some assumptions are also made in

M-LEACH like other routing protocols. Initially all nodes are homogeneous in sense of antenna
gain, all nodes have their location information through GPS and BS is considered fixed in M-

LEACH. Distributed setup phase of LEACH is modified by M-LEACH in order to select suitable

CHs. In M-LEACH CHs are elected on the basis of attenuation model [17]. Other criteria of CH

selection is mobility speed. Node with minimum mobility and lowest attenuation power selected

as CH. Then selected CHs broadcast their status to all nodes in transmission range. Nodes compute

their willingness from multiple CHs and select the CH with maximum residual energy.
In steady state phase, if nodes move away from CH or CH moves away from its member nodes

then other CH becomes suitable for member nodes.It results into inefficient clustering formation.

To deal this problem M-LEACH provides handover mechanism for nodes to switch on to new CH.

When nodes decide to make handoff, send DIS-JOIN message to current CH and also send JOIN

-REQ to new CH. After handoff occurring CHs re- schedule the transmission pattern. Flow chart
26 Chapter 2 HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS

of M-LEACH given in [16] is shown in Figure 2.10.

2.0.6 LEACH-selective cluster (LEACH-SC)

In earlier clustering routing protocol we address the position of nodes with respect to their CH and

BS to some extent. But LEACH-SC proposed in [8] deals with this problem and provide the rea-

sonable solutions about relative distance and position. Actually energy dissipation depends upon

the relative position and distance among non-CHs and CH and BS. Clustering protocol basically

try to minimize the distance of transmission between normal nodes to CH and CH to BS. But some
time nodes are sending data to CH in opposite direction to BS. In this scenario data is transmitted

with additional distance. LEACH-SC In order to save the energy cost of the sensor networks and

enhancing the system’s lifetime addresses these kinds of issues.

LEACH-SC is also divided into rounds like distributed LEACH. Each round is consisting of setup

phase and steady state phase. In setup phase CHs are elected in similar way as in LEACH [1]. But

LEACH-SC slightly alters the clustering formation algorithm. In improved clustering formation
algorithm of LEACH-SC selected CHs advertise their ID and location information to all nodes in

range. Each Non-CHs node receives this information of all CHs within its communication range.

Non-CH nodes compare information and select their CHs which is nearest to the middle-point be-

tween BS and comparing non-CH node. Basically in this improved clustering formation algorithm

they change the way of membership of non-CHs nodes to selected CHs. Flow chart of LEACH-SC

is shown in Figure 2.11[8].

 27

Figure 2.4 Flow chart of LEACH Routing protocol

28 Chapter 2 HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS

Figure 2.5 Flow chart of LEACH-Centralized routing protocol

 29

Figure 2.6 Flow chart of solar-aware Centralized LEACH routing protocol

30 Chapter 2 HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS

Figure 2.7 Flow chart of solar-aware Distributed LEACH routing protocol

 31

Base Station

Clusre-head node

Non-Cluster-head node

Figure 2.8 Multi-hopLEACH

32 Chapter 2 HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS

Figure 2.9 Flow chart of Multi-hopLEACH routing protocol

 33

Figure 2.10 Flow chart of M-LEACH routing protocol

34 Chapter 2 HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS

Figure 2.11 Flow chart of LEACH-SC routing protocol

Chapter 3

Analytical Comparison of Hierarchical

Routing Protocols

For analytical comparison, it is essential to be aware from Radio model assumption adopted by

EERP. All EERPs discussed in chapter 2 provide different assumptions about the radio distinc-

tiveness. These different characteristics cause significant variation in energy efficiency of routing

protocols. These assumptions differentiate energy dissipation to run transceiver and receiver cir-
cuitry per bit. Radio dissipates for transmit amplifier to attain suitable Eb/NO [1]. These are

also multiple assumptions in selection of suitable ε amp. Most acceptable value of these radio

characteristics which is assumed by extensive research work is given in the table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Radio Charactoristics

Operation Energy Dissipation

Transmitter Electronics (EelectTx) 50 nJ/bit

Receiver Electronics (EelecRx) 50 nJ/bit

Transmit amplifier (Eamp) 100 pJ/bit/m2

35
36 Chapter 3 Analytical Comparison of Hierarchical Routing Protocols

Transmitter and receiver Radio model is shown in figure 3.1. Mainly energy dissipation of a
individual node depends upon the number of transmissions, number of receiving, amount of data

to be transmit and distance between transmitter and receiver. So first we describe the possible

ways of energy consumption and then compare selected routing protocols and analyze how energy

efficiency is enhanced through these routing protocol.

ETx(d)

L bit packet Transmit

Electronics
Tx Amlifier
EeleTX *L Eamp *L*d2

L bit packet Receiver

Electronics

EeleRX *L

Figure 3.1 Radio Model

3.1 Energy consumption

There are multiple source of energy consumption and every energy efficient routing protocol deals

in different manner to reduce this energy consumption. This section provides Mathematical Anal-

ysis of these possible energy consumption sources. In mostly clustering routing protocol it is

assumed that nodes are uniformly distributed and there is free space communication model be-
3.1 Energy consumption 37

tween all nodes and BS.

As we know that in clustering routing protocols, duplex communication is needed some query-

based application. During upward communication nodes send their data to CH and CH forwards

aggregated data to BS. So Energy consumption on CH will be:

n n
ECH = ( − 1)(EeleRX × LC + × LC E AD + E eleT X × LA +
K K
2
E amp × LA × dtoBS ) (3.1)

Where n are all nodes in WSN, ECH is total upward communication energy consumption of

CH, ( Kn − 1) number of possible nodes in one cluster, K is possible number of clusters, LC is data
2
of non-CH nodes, E AD is energy cost for data aggregation, LA is aggregated data, dtoBS is distance

between CH and BS.

Energy consumption of single non-CH node will be:

2
EnonCH = E eleT X × LC + E amp × LC × dtoCH (3.2)

2
Where dtoCH is distance between CH and member node.

Energy consumption of all the nodes in one cluster will be:

n n 2
EnonCH × ( − 1) = ( − 1)(E eleT X × LC + E amp × LC × dtoCH ) (3.3)
k k

So total upward energy cost of single cluster will:

38 Chapter 3 Analytical Comparison of Hierarchical Routing Protocols

n
Eup = ECH + EnonCH × ( − 1) (3.4)
K

When BS has to get specific sensing information from nodes, in this case BS send instructions

to CHs only and CHs send these instructions to member nodes. In this process CHs and non-CHs

pay energy cost. There is no issue of energy consumption on BS so energy consumption of BS is

ignored. This downward energy cost is not consider in some cases, but it is certainly there. If BS

send instructions for all nodes to all CH, the energy consumption on CH will be:

n n
ECH = ( )E eleRX × LBS + ( − 1)
K K
(E eleT X + E amp × LBS × dto−nonCH ) (3.5)

When CH transmits to its member nodes, receiving nodes also consume energy and it will be equal
to:

n n
EnonCH ( − 1) = ( − 1)(E eleRX × LBS ) (3.6)
K K

Total downward energy consumption will be:

E down = EnonCH + ECH (3.7)

3.2 Energy Efficiency of Clustering Routing Protocols 39

So total estimated energy consumption for duplex communication of a single cluster will be:

E C = E up + E down (3.8)

From equation 3.8 total energy consumption of whole network can be also be estimated, and it

will be:

E T = EC × K (3.9)

Clustering routing protocols for WSN also bear energy dissipation in setup phase. During cluster

formation, energy is dissipated when CHs create TMDA schedule for member nodes. Every node

keep sensing continuously it also pay energy cost. These kind energy costs are ignored incase of

comparing clustering routing protocol.

3.2 Energy Efficiency of Clustering Routing Protocols

Hierarchical routing protocols we selected, compare their energy efficiency only with respect to

upward transmission energy dissipation. In this scenario all nodes have to transmit their data to

BS through multiple CHs. Distance between node and CH play key rule in energy improvement.
LEACH reduces energy dissipation over a factor of 7x and 8x reduction as compared to direct

communication and a factor of 4x and 8x compared to the minimum transmission[1]. This energy

efficiency is due to reduction of number of direct transmissions because in LEACH only CHs di-

rectly communicate to BS and remaining nodes have to transmit to CH which is at smaller distance.
40 Chapter 3 Analytical Comparison of Hierarchical Routing Protocols

The LEACH-Centralized is improved form of LEACH and enhance the network lifetime. Opti-
mal number of CHs and distance reduction between CH and normal nodes are the main factors in

order to increase network lifetime. The sLEACH provides better network life time as compare to

LEACH and also other compared routing protocols. It is because of CH selection is not uniform

in sLEACH. In sLEACH solar-aware nodes are, having more probability, to be selected as CHs as

compare to battery-driven nodes. Multi-Hop LEACH is more energy efficient than LEACH [11]

because Multi-Hop LEACH provides better connectivity and successful data rate as compare to
LEACH [12]. The reason behind this enhancement is multi-hop communication adopted by CHs.

As member nodes save energy by sending data to CH in LEACH instead of BS. Similarly in Multi-

Hop LEACH CH at longer distance from BS transmit data to next CH closer to BS instead of direct

transmission to BS. Multi-Hop LEACH is more effective energy efficient routing protocol when

network diameter is larger. Energy efficiency of multi-hop-LEACH can be better elaborate with

the example of linear network model shown in Figure 3.2. In this network two CHs A and B are
communicating to BS. Distance ’m’ between BS and two CH is considered to be uniform.
In order to calculate the transmitting energy cost of CHs A and B, which are directly transmit-

ting to BS will be:

2
Edir = E eleT X × LA + ε amp × LA × 2m + E eleT X × LB +
2
ε amp × LB × m (3.10)

Where EdirAB is total energy cost of CHs A and B, LA is aggregated data transmitted by CH A and
LB is aggregated data transmitted by CH B towards BS and m is equal distance among CHs and

BS. This happens in case of LEACH when every CH has to communicate directly to BS.

Similarly total transmitting energy cost can also be calculated when multi-hop communication
3.2 Energy Efficiency of Clustering Routing Protocols 41

Base Station

Clusre-head node

Non-Cluster-head node

A B C

Figure 3.2 Linear Network Model

is taking place. Multi-hop LEACH utilizes multi-hop communication. In this linear network if CH

A transmits data to CH B instead of BS then CH B has to transmit not only its own cluster’s data

but also has to transmit CH A’s data to BS. So Total transmitting energy const in case of Multi-
hopLEACH is:

2
EMulti−hop = E eleT X × LA + ε amp × LA × m + E eleRX × LA +
2
E eleT X × (LB + LA ) + ε amp × (LB + LA ) × m (3.11)

Where EMulti−AB is total transmitting energy cost of both CHs in case of multi-hop communi-
42 Chapter 3 Analytical Comparison of Hierarchical Routing Protocols

cation of Multi-hop LEACH. CH near BS has more traffic burden in case of Multi-hopLEACH.
But CH which is at longer distance from BS has benefits because it has to transmit at small dis-

tance and increase its lifetime. As equations 3.10 and 3.11 measuring that Multi-hop LEACH is

consuming more energy apparently, that’s why it is very important to know that Multi-hop LEACH

will be only effective when the network is very large and some CHs are at longer distance from

BS. Otherwise LEACH and other routing protocols allowing single-hop communication between

CH and BS will be more effective.

LEACH-SC is also more energy efficient as compare to LEACH. As we know distance is directly

proportional to energy consumption and LEACH-SC is more efficient because it minimize the

backward communication of all nodes with respect to BS.

3.3 Comparison of LEACH and its modified routing protocols

in WSNs

All routing protocols have some significant properties and address specific issues to produce some

betterment in existing routing protocols. Each routing protocol has some advantages and capabili-

ties to handle issues like Cost of Clustering, Selection of CHs and Clusters, Synchronization, Data

Aggregation, Repair Mechanisms, scalability, mobility, and initial energy level for all nodes[14].

We compare above mentioned routing protocols with respect to some very important performance

parameters for WSN. These parameters are following.

Classification

The classification based routing protocol indicate that it is either flat or location-based or hierarchal

routing protocol [15].

3.3 Comparison of LEACH and its modified routing protocols in WSNs 43

Mobility

It specifies that routing protocol is designed for fixed nodes or mobile nodes.

Scalability

It shows much routing protocol is scalable and can be efficient if the network density is increased.

Self-organization

It is very important for routing protocol to adopt the changes in network. Nodes configuration and

re-configuration should be performed by routing protocol by self-organization at the time when

nodes enter or leave the network [15].

Randomized Rotation of CH

Randomized Rotation of CH is very necessary in order to drain the battery of all nodes equally [1].

Distributed clustering algorithm

CHs are self-elected in distributed clustering algorithm and nodes select their CH in distributed

manner [1].

Centralized clustering algorithm

CHs are selected by BS by central control algorithm [3].

Single-hop or Multi-hop

It is also important feature of routing protocol. Single-hop is energy efficient if it is smaller area

of network and multi-hop is better for denser network [11].

44 Chapter 3 Analytical Comparison of Hierarchical Routing Protocols

Energy Efficiency

It is the main concern of energy efficient routing protocol to maximize the life time of the network

[1], [2], [4], [11], [15].

Resources awareness

Sensor network has limited resources like battery and sensing capability. Routing protocols should

be well aware from these resources [8].

Data Aggregation

In order to reduce the data amount transmitted to BS, CH perform data-aggregation. In this way
CH transmission energy cost is reduced [1], [2].

Homogeneous

Homogeneity of all nodes is considered in the all routing protocol which describe that initial en-

ergy level of all the nodes is similar.

Table 3.2 shows the performance comparison of LEACH, LEACH-C sLEACH, M-LEACH,

Multi-Hop LEACH and LEACH-SC. From Performance comparison it can be shown that behav-

ior of these routing protocol are similar in many ways. All routing protocol are hierarchal, ho-

mogeneous, perform Data aggregation, self-organization,randomized rotation of CHs and having

fixed BS despite M-LEACH and . LEACH, LEACH-SC,M-LEACH and Multi-Hop LEACH use

distributed algorithm for CH selection. LEACH-C uses central control Algorithm for CH selec-
tion and sLEACH is designed for both centralized and distributed algorithm. LEACH, sLEACH,

LEACH-SC and M-LEACH are routing protocol in which BS is at single-hop and in Multi-Hop
3.3 Comparison of LEACH and its modified routing protocols in WSNs 45

LEACH, BS can be at multi-hop distance from the CH. LEACH and M-LEACH allow limited
scalability. LEACH-C sLEACH and LEACH-SC allow good scalability while Multi-Hop LEACH

is providing maximum scalability feature due to multi-hop communication option for CHs.
46 Chapter 3 Analytical Comparison of Hierarchical Routing Protocols

Table 3.2 Performance comparison of LEACH and its modified routing protocols in
WSNs
Clustering Classi- Mobi- Scala- Self Rando- Dis- Cen- Hop Energy Resou- Data homo-

Routing fication lity bility organi- mized tri- tra- count Effi- rces ag- gen-

protocol zation rota- buted lized ciency aware- gre- eous

tion ness ga-

tion

LEACH Hierar- fixed Limt. Yes Yes Yes No SHP High Good Yes Yes

chical BS

LEACH Hierar- fixed Good Yes yes No Yes SHP High Good Yes Yes

Centrl- chical BS

ized

sLEACH Hierar- fixed Good Yes Yes No Yes SHP Very Very Yes Yes

Central- chical BS High Good

ized

sLEACH Hierar- fixed Good Yes Yes Yes No SHP Very Very Yes Yes
Dis- chical BS High Good

tributed

Multi Hierar- fixed Very Yes Yes Yes No MHP Very Very Yes Yes

Hop chical BS Good High Good

LEACH

M- Hierar- Mobile Very Yes Yes Yes No SHP Very Very Yes Yes

LEACH chical BS Good High Good

and

Nodes

LEACH- Hierar- fixed Good Yes Yes Yes No SHP High Good Yes Yes

SC chical BS
Chapter 4

Simulation Results

In this section we simulate LEACH,LEACH-C Multi-hop LEACH, M-LEACH, sLEACH-Centralized,

sLEACH-Distributed and LEACH-SC to make efficient critical analysis. simulation parameters

are shown in table 4.1. This simulation is implemented by using MATLAB. 100 nodes are scat-

tered uniformly in region of 100m * 100m. During simulation of these routing protocols we ad-

justed the network topology according to realtime behavior of sensors nodes and also consider

re-energization ability of solar-driven sensors in sLECAH nodes to abstain more realistic simula-

tion results.

Fig 4.1 shows the network life time. In LEACH all nodes reach to death first and then LEACH-

C,M-LEACH, LEACH-SC, Multi-hop LEACH, sLEACH-Centralized and then sLEACH-distributed

respectively. In solar-aware LEACH routing protocols nodes die after longest period of time be-

cause solar-awre nodes have ability to re-energize themselves for certain period. sLEACH has

300% more network lifetime as compare to LEACH, because in sLEACH last node is dying af-
ter 4000 rounds. sLEACH efficiency can also be improved by adding more solar-driven nodes as

compare to battery driven nodes. sLEACH-Distributed is slightly better then sLEACH-Centralized

because in sLEACH-Distributed localized clustering formation is performed. LEACH-C has al-

47
48 Chapter 4 Simulation Results

Table 4.1 Simulation Environment

Parameter value

Network size 100m * 100m

Initial Energy 0.5 J

p 0.1

Data Aggregation Energy cost 50pJ/bit

Number of nodes 100

Packet size 200 bit

EelectTx 50 nJ/bit

EelecRx 50 nJ/bit

most 23% better network lifetime as compare to LEACH and LEACH-SC has almost 33% better

network lifetime as compare to LEACH. M-LEACH has 30% better network lifetime as compare

to LEACH and its last node reaches to death after 500 rounds. In Multi-hop LEACH routing pro-

tocol produces almost 90% network life enhancement as compare to LEACH and it can be further

improved if the network diameter is increased.

Fig 4.2 shows the number of allive nodes with respect to number of rounds for all selected

routing protocols. Till 500 rounds all nodes are allive for every for every routing protocol. Stable

period in which all nodes are allive is maximum in LEACH-C and sLEACH-Centralized as com-

pare to all other distributed routing protocols. LEACH has 28 %, 33%, 35%, 120% and 300% less
survival time as compare to M-LEACH, Multi-hop LEACH, and sLEACH respectively.
 49

100

M−LEACH
90 Multi−hopLEACH
LEACH
sLEACH−Centralized
80 sLEACH−Distributed
LEACH−C
LEACH−SC
70
y(Dead Nodes)

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
x(rounds)

Figure 4.1 Dead Nodes/round

Quality of routing protocol is depending upon the date (actual data signal) successfully transfer

to BS. If data received by BS is increasing it means quality of routing protocol is getting better and

better. Fig 4.3 shows the data received by BS. As CHs are only responsible for aggregating and
transmitting data to BS, routing protocols with optimum number of CHs will be more efficient.

Multi-hop LEACH has better quality than LEACH. Because in large network, CHs at the corner

of the network have to transmit to next CH towards BS while in LEACH, CHs have to transmit

directly to BS at longer distance, that will result into poor signal strength and less successful data

transmission. M-LEACH also provides better quality in dynamic topology of network. Compara-

tively sLEACH has maximum quality because in sLEACH, CHs are elected on the basis of solar
property of nodes. Maximum CHs in sLEACH are solar-driven nodes and these CHs serve for

longer period of time as compare to battery-driven CHs in sLEACH. These solar-driven CHs have
50 Chapter 4 Simulation Results

100
M−LEACH
Multi−hopLEACH
LEACH
90
sLEACH−Centralized
sLEACH−Distributed
LEACH−C
80 LEACH−SC

70
y(Allive Nodes)

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
x(rounds)

Figure 4.2 Allive Nodes/round

enough energy to transmit at longer distance with acceptable signal strength that’s why sLEACH

has maximum quality of network. In sLEACH, sLEACH-Distributed has more quality as compare

to sLEACH-Centralized. It is because of increasing probability of solar-driven nodes to be CHs

and its proved by equation 2.2 of our thesis. LEACH has minimum data transmitted to BS as
compare to all other routing protocols. LEACH-C has significant performance because optimal

guaranteed CHs are selected for every round. LEACH-SC, M-LEACH and Multi-hop LEACH are

performing better as compare to LEACH.

As data to BS is important factor for quality analysis of any routing protocol, similarly data

(data signal) to CH is also important. Fig 4.4 shows the data received by CH. Results are similar
 51

4
x 10
2

M−LEACH
Multi−hopLEACH
1.8
LEACH
sLEACH−Centralized
sLEACH−Distributed
1.6
LEACH−C
LEACH−SC

1.4

1.2
y(Data to BS)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
x(rounds)

Figure 4.3 DataToBS/round

as we computed from Fig 4.3 however LEACH-C is not as efficient in data to CHs as in Data to

BS, because normal nodes are reduced due to consistent percentage of CHs for all rounds. In this

case sLEACH-Centralized is also very much better than LEACH. As compared to LEACH, Other

improved routing protocols M-LEACH, Multi-hop LEACH and LEACH-SC deliver more data to
CHs by normal nodes.

AS LEACH, M-LEACH, LEACH-SC Multi-hop LEACH and sLEACH-Distributed use dis-

tributed self-organization algorithm, because of this optimal number of CHs are not guaranteed,
as compared to LEACH-C and sLEACH-Centralized which use central control algorithm. Fig 4.5

shows uncertain number of CHs elected per rounds. Results shows that LEACH and M-LEACH
52 Chapter 4 Simulation Results

4
x 10
12
M−LEACH
Multi−hopLEACH
LEACH
sLEACH−Centralized
10 sLEACH−Distributed
LEACH−C
LEACH−SC

8
y(Data to CH)

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
x(rounds)

Figure 4.4 DataToCH/round

show more uncertainty as compare to other routing protocols. sLEACH-Distributed is slightly

better in case of CHs selection because criteria of randomized rotation of CHs is modified from

LEACH. LEACH-C and sLEACH-Centralized use central control algorithm, that’s why number of

CHs are specific and not random as distributed routing protocols. Uncertainty about CHs selection
for Distributed HCRPs is decreasing the performance of these protocols.
 53

20

18 M−LEACH
Multi−hopLEACH
LEACH
16 sLEACH−Centralized
sLEACH−Centralized
LEACH−C
14 LEACH−SC

12
y(CHs)

10

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
x(rounds)

Figure 4.5 CHs/round

54 Chapter 4 Simulation Results
Chapter 5

Conclusions and Future Work

In our thesis we discussed LEACH, LEACH-C, Multi-hop LEACH, M-LEACH, Solar-aware LEACH
and LEACH-SC, HCRP, for WSNs. The main objective of our thesis is to examine the energy ef-

ficiency management and throughput enhancement of these routing protocols. We compare the

lifetime and data delivery characteristics with the help of analytical comparison and also from our

simulation results. As simulation results indicate that sLEACH is providing maximum energy and

quality efficiency. In future work these techniques should be the area of interest. Noteworthy

study work has been done in these different cluster-based routing protocols in order to increase
the data delivery, lifetime and energy conservation features. Certainly further energy improvement

is possible in future work especially in optimal guaranteed CHs selecting distributed and central-

ized algorithms. Improvement is possible in many aspects like Sensor Nodes electronics, nodes

deployment management and heterogeneous environment selection for WSNs.

55
56 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Future Work
Bibliography

[1] Jamal N. Al-Karaki, et al., "A survey on Routing Techniques in Wireless Sensor Network"
IEEE Wireless Communications, December 2004

[2] Heinzelman W. B., et al., "An application-specific protocol architecture for wireless mi-
crosensor networks," IEEE Trans on Wireless Communications, Vol. 1, No. 4, 2002, pp.
660-670, doi: 10.1109/TWC.2002.804190.

[3] X. H. Wu, S. Wang, "Performance comparison of LEACH and LEACH-C protocols by NS2,"
pp. 254-258, 2010

[4] P.T.V.Bhuvaneswari and V.Vaidehi, " Survey on Enhancement techniques Incorporated in

LEACH" Department of Electronics Engineering, Madras Institute Technology, Anna Uni-
versity Chennai, India, 2009.

[5] Wu Xinhua and Huang Li "Research and Improvement of the LEACH Protocol to Reduce the
Marginalization of Cluster Head "Journal of Wuhan University of Technology Vol. 35, No. 1,
Feb. 2011, pp. 79-82, doi:10.3963/j.issn.1006-2823.2011.01.019 (in Chinese).

[6] Tao, et al., "An Improvement for LEACH Algorithm in Wireless Sensor Network" Proc.5th
IEEE Conf. Indust.Electr. Appl. 2010;1:1811-4.

[7] S.K. Singh, et al., "A survey of Energy-Efficient Hierarchical Cluster-based Routing in Wire-
less Sensor Networks", IJANA, Sept.-Oct. 2010, vol. 02, issue 02, pp. 570-580.

[8] W.Jun, et al., "A Distance-based Clustering Routing Protocol in Wireless Sensor Networks"
2011

[9] Thiemo Voigt, et al. ". Solar-aware Clustering in Wireless Sensor Networks", June 2004

[10] Md. Junayed Islam, et al., "A-sLEACH : An Advanced Solar Aware Leach Protocol for En-
ergy Efficient Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks" 2007

[11] F.Xiangning, S.Yulin "Improvement on LEACH Protocol of Wireless Sensor Network" 2007.

57
58 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[12] Rajashree.V.Biradar, et al., "Multihop Routing In Self-Organizing Wireless Sensor Net-

works" IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues, Vol. 8, Issue 1, January
2011.

[13] Israr N and Awan I, "Multihop clustering Algorithm for load balancing in Wireless Sensor
Networks," 2007, vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 13-25.

[14] W. Heinzelman, et al., "Energy-efficient routing protocols for wireless microsensor net-
works," in Proc. 33rd 2000.

[15] S. D. Muruganathan, et al., "A Centralized Energy-Efficient Routing Protocol for Wireless
Sensor Networks," Mar 2005, pp.S8-13.

[16] L.T.Nguyen, et al., "An Energy Efficient Routing Scheme for Mobile Wireless Sensor Net-
works", IEEE, 2008.

[17] I. F. Akyildiz, et al., "Signal propagation techniques for wireless underground communica-
tions networks," Phys. Comm., vol. 2, pp 167-183, 2009.
 Index

HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS, 17

LEACH, 17
LEACH-C, 21
LEACH-SC, 26

M-LEACH, 25
Multi-hopLEACH, 24

Sensor Node, 1
sLEACH, 22
sLEACH-Centralized, 22
sLEACH-Distributed, 23

Wireless Sensor Network, 1

59

View publication stats