MINOR-1 PROJECT

REPORT

ON

Performance analysis and evaluation of clustering and

routing protocol in WSN
Submitted By

Specialization SAP ID Name

AI-ML 500084392 MOHAMMAD MUJTABA AKHTAR

AL-ML 500083090 KETAN GARG

AI-ML 500083536 ROUNAK BAHUGUNA

AI-ML 500084117 LOHITAKSH SINGH

Under the guidance of

Dr. Prateek Gupta

Assistant Professor

School Of Computer Science

UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM & ENERGY STUDIES

Dr. Prateek Gupta Dr. Thipendra P SINGH

Project Guide Cluster Head

1|Page
 Table of Contents
Page No

1 Candidate Declaration 3

2 Abstract 4

3 Introduction 5

4 Purpose of project 6

5 Project Scope 6

6 Project Description 6

7 System Requirements 7

8 Methods 8

9 Literature review 9

10 Result and discussion 10

11 Pert chart 11

12 Conclusion 12

13 Acknowledgement 13

2|Page
 CANDIDATES’ DECLARATION

We hereby declare that the minor project work being presented

in this report entitled “WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORK”
(WSN) is submitted in the Department of Informatics (SOCS).
It is the authentic work carried out by us under the guidance of
Dr. Prateek Gupta (Assistant Professor). We would like to
express our special thanks to mentor who gave us the golden
opportunity to do this project to understand about research in
WSN, which also helped us to undertake a lot of research and we
came to learn many new things.

3|Page
 Abstract

Efficient clustering method can effectively scale down the energy

consumption of sensor nodes (SNs) in WSN. In this project, we will
analyse different clustering routing algorithm for analysing the best
protocol in term of energy consumption of SNs and electing clustering
node on the basis of sensor node that has better residual energy as
compared to other nodes. Cluster heads collect the data from other node
in their range and sends the aggregated data to the base station (BS).
Various energy efficient protocols have been designed for either
homogeneous or heterogeneous networks. Primarily homogeneous
networks comprise of SNs possessing same energy resources at the
beginning of network whereas in heterogeneous networks, SNs are
equipped with varying energy resources. The SNs cannot dissipate
same amount of energy due to radio communication characteristic. It is
a difficult task to build energy-efficient protocols that can operate well
on both homogeneous and heterogeneous networks. In this project, we
compare the clustering protocols i.e., LEACH, DEEC, HEED, SEP in
which we will analyse, compare and try to find out the best algorithm
based on the network lifetime, stability region, energy consumption,
number of packets, number of alive normal node, number of alive
advance node, average number of cluster head per rounds.

4|Page
 Introduction
WSNs consist of number of small battery-operated devices known as
SNs.These SNs are followed with three basic principles: data sense
from external surroundings, computation on sensed data and data
transmission wirelessly. After the implementation of the network in the
field, the batteries can’t be changed. Therefore, the lifetime is limited
because of the limited energy of the battery. Instead of wasting energy
in direct communication to the BS, SNs send their sensed data to their
CHs that combine these data packets into a meaningful information by
applying some mathematical operations such as aggregation, fusion etc.
WSN applications can be classified into two categories: monitoring and
tracking. Monitoring applications include indoor or outdoor
environmental monitoring. Tracking applications include tracking
objects, animals, humans, and vehicles. Wireless sensor networks have
been widely applied in the field of medical health, military surveillance,
environmental sensing etc.
In the last decade, many clustering approaches have been
proposed for WSNs in which the energy conservation is the common
objective. The main part of each approach (protocol) is the CH’s
selection algorithm that defines the energy efficiency of the network by
using this well-known clustering protocols which work on the stability
region such as LEACH, SEP and DEEC and referred asstability-based
clustering algorithms.
In this project we compare LEACH, SEP, HEED and DEEC
protocols to analyze and compare these clustering and routing protocols
result in better network lifetime, stability region, energy consumption,
number of packets, number of alive normal node, number of alive
advance node, average number ofcluster head per rounds and try to
find the better clustering protocol result on the basis of above-
mentioned parameters.

5|Page
 Purpose of Project
Purpose of the project to analyses LEACH, SEP, DEEC. HEED protocols and
compare these clustering routing protocols results in terms of better network
lifetime, stability region, energy consumption, number of packets, number of alive
normal nodes, number of alive advance nodes, average number of cluster head per
rounds and try to find the better protocols result on the basis of above-mentioned
parameters.

Project Scope
The battery life time of sensor node is minimum and once deployed into area of
unstructured framework batteries cannot change. A Hierarchal routing Protocol in
WSN helps to enhance the life time of the battery- operated sensor nodes and the
sensor nodes works longer. So, the communication between the environment and
sensor node would not be interrupt. This protocol can be used in many areas of
environment like Military Applications, Transportation Applications,
Medical/Health Applications, Agricultural Applications etc. Future researches can
be made on the mentioned protocols so that it can perform well in real time.

Project Description
The protocols we use which is capable of enhancing the life time of battery-
operated sensor devices i.e., LEACH, SEP, DEEC and HEED. In the initial stage
we used LEACH protocol to calculate the energy of sensor node after each round
then we used SEP, DEEC and HEED to analyze their performance on the basis of
lifetime, stability region, energy - consumption, number of packets, number of
alive normal nodes, number of alive advance nodes, average number of cluster
head per rounds.

6|Page
 System Requirements
User Interface: MATLAB, Internet connection

NON-FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS:

Software Quality Attributes:

Availability: Our project will be uploaded on platform cloud, GitHub which

will make the project accessible to all.

Portability: The project can work on any web browser on any system, which

makes the project portable.

Environment: User needs a MATLAB interface with any operating system.

Usability: The model is easy to use as it requires an initial Energy and different
parameters values as an input and it will predict the output in the form of graph.

. Software Interface

Following is the software for implementation:

Software used Description

Operating System We have chosen the Windows operating system for its
bestsupport and user-friendliness.
MATLAB R2022b To implement the project, we have chosen MATLAB
programming languageto implement the codes

7|Page
 Methods
We compare the clustering protocols i.e., LEACH, SEP DEEC and HEED in
which we will analyse, compare and try to find out the best algorithm based
on the network lifetime, stability region, energy consumption, number of
packets, number of alive normal node, number of alive advance node, average
number of cluster head per rounds.

we use concept of 2D array by which we can store our data in form of matrices
by which we can represent our graph on the basis of above parameters.

The 2D array is organized as matrices which can be represented as the

collection of rows and columns in the form of [ ]m*n..

8|Page
 Literature Review
W. B. Heinzelman et al. [2] describe leach a clustering -based
routing protocol for Wireless Sensor Network. The sensor is
organized into cluster and randomly select a few nodes as
cluster head with certain probabilities of becoming a cluster
head per round where the information of node location and
energy level was communicated to BS. Cluster count (cluster
head) is not fixed in each round per epoch. So, cluster head
count varies in each round.
O. Younis et al .[1] improved the LEACH protocol by using
residual energy, node degree or density as a main parameter for
cluster formation to achieve power balancing. The algorithms
proposed in this protocol periodically selects cluster heads
based on the two basic parameters. The first primary parameter
is the residual energy of each node, second parameter is the
intra-cluster communication. HEED is not able to fix the
cluster count in each round and it is also not aware of
heterogeneity.
Georgios S. et al. [3] introduces the heterogeneity that prolongs
the time interval before the death of first node called stability
period. This protocol is based on the weighted election
probabilities of each node to become cluster head according to
the remaining energy in each node. There are two types of
nodes which are considered as normal nodes and advanced
nodes. Author extended the LEACH protocol except the
heterogeneity.
Li Qing et al [6] proposed a distributed multilevel clustering
algorithm for heterogeneous WSN. In DEEC, the cluster-heads
are elected by a probability based on the ratio between residual
energy of each node and the average energy of the network.
The epochs of being cluster-heads for nodes are different
according to their initial and residual energy. The nodes with
high initial and residual energy will have more chances to
be the cluster-heads than the nodes with lowenergy

9|Page
 Result and discussion

performance
LEACH SEP DEEC HEED
criteria

Heterogeneity Two level and

Not present Two Multilevel
level Multilevel

Lower than
Cluster Stability SEP and Moderate High High
DEEC

Low as compare to
High as compare to
Energy Efficient SEP and Moderate High
DEEC
DEEC

Based on Initial Based on Initial,

Cluster headSelection Based on Residual
Rotating policy energy ofadvance Residual Energy, nodes
criterion Energy
node density

Prolong Network
Prolong Network
Lower than Lifetime than
Network Lifetime Moderate Lifetime thanSEP and
SEP and DEEC SEP,
LEACH
LEACH and DEEC

Not best fit for

Stability region Low Moderate High stability it is best in
case network lifetime

10 | P a g e
11 | P a g e
12 | P a g e
13 | P a g e
14 | P a g e
15 | P a g e
 The result shows that HEED is a better protocol in

terms of network lifetime whereas LEACH, SEP

and DEEC is better in terms of stability. The table

shows the comparison of four protocols under

various performance metrics.

16 | P a g e
 PERT CHART

17 | P a g e
 Conclusion
In this project we analyzed the hierarchical routing protocols
that are: LEACH, SEP, HEED, DEEC. Also compare
protocols in different parameters i.e., network lifetime,
stability region, energy consumption, number of packets,
number of alive normal node, number of alive advance node,
average number of cluster head per rounds. DEEC does not
require any global knowledge of energy at every election
round unlike SEP, LEACH and DEEC can perform well in
two level, three level and multi-level heterogeneous wireless
sensor networks. The main part of each approach (protocol)
is the CH’s selection algorithm that defines the energy
efficiency of the network by using this well-known
clustering protocols which work on the stability region
which are LEACH, SEP and DEEC. Whereas Simulation
results shows that HEED outperforms the best in network
lifetime among above four protocols.

18 | P a g e
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Prateek
Gupta, UPES, for giving me the support I needed to
reach the top and for giving me the chance to work on
the project. I owe a great deal to my group members
for their inspiring encouragement, supportive
direction, and gracious oversight in helping me finish
my project.
I want to express my gratitude and debt to the
activity coordinator Dr. Teekam Singh, whose
invaluable advice and patient guidance I received
throughout the course helped to shape the current
work as its display.
Presentation inspiration and motivation have
always played a key role in the success of any venture.

THANK YOU

19 | P a g e