A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN

WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

A Thesis Submitted For the Fulfilment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY

IN

COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

SUMIT BHATT

(Roll No. 210000705007)

Under The Supervision of
MR. SANJAY KUMAR
H.O.D.

FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE & ENGINEERING

VEER MADHO SINGH BHANDARI

UTTRAKHAND TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, DEHRADUN

2023
 CERTIFICATE

Certified that research work entitled “A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN WIRELESS

SENSOR NETWORKS”, is a bonafide work carried out by SUMIT BHATT in partial fulfilment for the award of

Master of Technology in Computer Science & Engineering from Department of Computer Science &

Engineering, Veer Madho Singh Bhandari Uttrakhand Technical University, Dehradun.

Date:

Supervisor

MR. SANJAY KUMAR

H.O.D.

Department of Computer Science & Engineering

Veer Madho Singh Bhandari

Uttrakhand Technical University, Dehradun

 DECLARATION

I declare that

a. The work contained in this thesis is original and has been done by myself under the supervision of

my supervisor/s.

b. The work has not been submitted to any other Institute for any Degree.

c. I have followed the Institute norms and guidelines and abide by the regulation as given in the Ethical

Code of Conduct of the Institute.

d. Whenever I have used materials (data, theory and text) from other sources, I have given due credit

to them by citing them in the text of the thesis and giving their details in the reference section.

e. The thesis document has been thoroughly checked to exclude plagiarism.

Date :

Place:

SUMIT BHATT

Roll No. 210000705007

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all those who helped me in the successful completion of my

venture. I would like to thank to my Supervisor MR. SANJAY KUMAR, Head of Department, Department of

Computer Science & Engineering, Veer Madho Singh Bhandari Uttrakhand Technical University, Dehradun

for helping me in the successful accomplishment of my study and for his timely and valuable suggestions.

His constructive criticism has contributed immensely to the evolution of my ideas on the subject.

I am exceedingly grateful to other faculty members for their inspiration and encouragement. I would also

like to thank my parents and friends for their overwhelming and whole hearted encouragement and support

without which this would not have been successful.

SUMIT BHATT
M.Tech. Student

Roll No. 210000705007

 ABSTRACT

Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) has been widely used for monitoring and control applications

in our daily lives due to its promising features; such as low cost, low power, and ease of

implementation. The choice of energy efficient routing protocol is a vital task in the network

layer of wireless sensor networks to improve their lifetime. A performance analysis of energy

consumption referring to opportunistic routing algorithms is presented in this paper. The

particularly analysis is evaluated in terms of energy consumption, number of candidate groups,

flow rate, number of packets lost, and lifetime. Based on the simulation results, we observe that

opportunistic routing protocol perform better characteristic than traditional protocol (TR).

Furthermore, our findings disclose that opportunistic routing algorithm yields in a significant

improvement of power consumption.

In wireless sensor networks, protocols play a major and important role. These protocols vary

depending on the application and network architecture. It has specifically designed data centric,

location based and hierarchical protocols where special attention is taken to energy awareness.

The main objective of this research is to discuss the routing protocol and its comparison. These

are the basic protocols for data centric, location based and hierarchical.

In my research I will be comparing basic routing protocols and finding the most efficient routing

protocols among them. These protocols were originally proposed for wired networks. But later

wireless sensor networks were proposed to increase the efficiency of sensor nodes and lifespan.

These protocols also reduce network overhead and traffic.

 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCATION
1.1 Wireless Sensor Network (WSN):

A Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) consists of a collection of spatially distributed sensors that
are dedicated to monitoring and recording environmental conditions. These sensors gather data
related to factors such as temperature, sound, pollution levels, humidity, and wind. The collected
information is then centralized for further analysis. WSNs utilize self-governing devices
equipped with sensors to monitor physical or environmental parameters. These networks play a
crucial role in monitoring various aspects, including temperature, pressure, wind direction,
illumination, vibration intensity, sound levels, power-line voltage, chemical concentrations,
pollutant levels, and even vital body functions. The widespread deployment of sensors enables
efficient data collection and analysis across diverse applications.

Figure1.1: Wireless Sensor Network

 1.1 Types of WSNs (Wireless Sensor Networks)
Depending on the environment, the types of networks are decided so that those can be deployed

underwater, underground, on land, and so on. Different types of WSNs include:

1. Terrestrial WSNs

2. Underground WSNs

3. Underwater WSNs

4. Multimedia WSNs

5. Mobile WSNs

Terrestrial WSNs

Terrestrial WSNs efficiently communicate with base stations and comprise hundreds to
thousands of wireless sensor nodes. These nodes are deployed either in an unstructured (ad hoc)
or structured (preplanned) manner. In the unstructured mode, sensor nodes are randomly
distributed across the target area, akin to dropping them from a fixed plane. In contrast, the
preplanned or structured mode involves deliberate placement strategies, including optimal
placement, grid-based arrangements, and 2D or 3D models.
In such WSNs, battery power is limited, but solar cells serve as a secondary power source.
Energy conservation is achieved through strategies like low duty cycle operations, minimizing
delays, and optimizing routing protocols.

2. Underground WSNs

Compared to terrestrial WSNs, underground wireless sensor networks are more costly due to
factors like deployment, maintenance, and equipment expenses. These networks comprise hidden
sensor nodes embedded in the ground to monitor subterranean conditions. To transmit data from
the sensor nodes to the base station, additional sink nodes are positioned above ground.
However, recharging the sensor battery nodes deployed underground is challenging due to their
limited battery capacity. Additionally, wireless communication faces difficulties in the
underground environment due to significant signal attenuation and loss.
 3. Under Water WSNs

Over 70% of the Earth’s surface is covered by water. Underwater WSNs comprise sensor nodes
and vehicles deployed in aquatic environments. Autonomous underwater vehicles play a crucial
role in collecting data from these submerged sensor nodes. However, underwater communication
faces challenges such as long propagation delays, limited bandwidth, and sensor failures.
In underwater WSNs, the sensor nodes operate on finite battery power that cannot be recharged
or replaced. Addressing energy conservation in this context requires advancements in underwater
communication and networking techniques.

4. Multimedia WSNs

Multimedia WSNs have been proposed to facilitate event tracking and monitoring using various
forms of multimedia, including images, videos, and audio. These networks consist of cost-
effective sensor nodes equipped with microphones and cameras. These nodes communicate
wirelessly, enabling tasks such as data compression, retrieval, and correlation.
However, multimedia WSNs face several challenges, including high energy consumption,
substantial bandwidth requirements, intricate data processing, and compression techniques.
Additionally, delivering multimedia content efficiently demands ample bandwidth

5 Mobile WSNs:
o These networks consist of sensor nodes capable of autonomous movement and interaction with
the physical environment.
o Mobile nodes can compute, sense, and communicate.
o Compared to static sensor networks, MWSNs offer greater versatility.
o Advantages of MWSNs over static networks include improved coverage, enhanced energy
efficiency, superior channel capacity, and more

.Limitations of Wireless Sensor Networks:

5. Limited storage capacity (a few hundred kilobytes).
6. Modest processing power (around 8 MHz).
7. Short communication range, leading to higher power consumption.
8. Energy constraints due to minimal available power.
9. Finite battery lifetime.
10. Passive devices contribute minimal energy.
 1.3 Applications of Wireless Sensor Networks:
Military Applications: WSNs play a crucial role in military command, control,
communications, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. Sensor technology detects
enemy intrusions.

Area Monitoring: Deployed sensor nodes monitor specific regions for events such as heat,
pressure, or motion. When an event is detected, base stations take relevant actions. For instance,
oil refineries in places like Hoima benefit from this monitoring.

Transportation:

WSNs play a crucial role in real-time traffic systems.Sensors collect data, which is then used by
transportation models (such as traffic lights) to alert drivers about congestion and traffic
issues.This technology is also aiding research on self-driving cars.

Health Applications:

WSNs are integrated into wearable devices like smartwatches.Health-related applications include
interfaces for people with disabilities, patient monitoring, diagnostics, drug administration in
hospitals, tele-monitoring of physiological data, and tracking doctors or patients within hospital
premises.

Environmental Sensing:

Environmental Sensor Networks cover various applications related to earth science

research.Examples include monitoring volcanoes, oceans, glaciers, and forests.

Specific areas of focus include 1

1 air pollution monitoring

2 forest fire detection,

3 greenhouse monitoring

4 landslide detection.

6 Structural Monitoring:

o Wireless sensor technology is effectively used to monitor activities within buildings and
infrastructure, including bridges, flyovers, embankments, and tunnels.
o By deploying sensors, engineering practices can remotely monitor assets, eliminating the need
for costly site visits.
o Notable examples include the hydro-electric power plant at Bujagali Falls in Jinja, situated along
the Nile River.
 7 Industrial Monitoring:

At East African Breweries in Luzira, wireless sensor networks have been implemented for
machinery condition-based maintenance (CBM).

These networks offer significant cost savings and enable new functionalities.

Unlike wired systems, where sensor installation is often limited by wiring costs, wireless
solutions provide greater flexibility.

8 Agricultural Sector:

Farmers can leverage wireless sensor networks to eliminate the need for wiring maintenance in
challenging farming environments.

Automation of farming activities, such as irrigation, enhances water efficiency and reduces
waste.

Environmental Tracking:WSNs are used for environmental monitoring, including forest

detection, animal tracking, flood detection, weather forecasting, and seismic activity prediction.
Commercial applications also benefit from these networks.

Military Applications:WSNs play a crucial role in tracking and monitoring environments for
military purposes.
Sensor nodes are deployed in specific fields of interest and remotely controlled by users.
These networks aid in enemy tracking and security detection.

Health Applications:
WSNs facilitate patient and doctor tracking and monitoring.

Transport Systems:WSNs are widely used for traffic monitoring, dynamic routing management,
and parking lot surveillance.

Other Applications:Rapid emergency response, industrial process monitoring, automated

building climate control, ecosystem and habitat monitoring, and civil structural health
monitoring all benefit from WSNs.

o
 Figure1.2 Wireless Sensor Networks Applications

There are three catagories of sensor nodes

1. Passive, Omni Directional Sensors:

o These sensor nodes sense the environment without actively probing or manipulating it.
o Energy is only required to amplify their analog signals.
o Directionality is not a factor in measuring the environment.

2. Passive, Narrow-Beam Sensors:

o These sensors are also passive but are specifically concerned with direction when sensing the
environment

3. Active Sensors:
o Active sensors actively probe and interact with the environment.
o They play an active role in data collection.
 Advantages:

 Infrastructure Flexibility: WSNs can be set up without relying on fixed infrastructure.

 Remote Coverage: Ideal for areas that are hard to reach, such as across seas, mountains, rural
regions, or deep forests.
 Ad Hoc Flexibility: WSNs can adapt to ad hoc situations when additional workstations are
needed.
 Cost-Effective Implementation: Setting up WSNs is relatively inexpensive.

Disadvantages:

 Security Concerns: WSNs are less secure, as hackers can potentially access the network and
retrieve information.
 Lower Speed: Compared to wired networks, WSNs operate at lower speeds.
 Configuration Complexity: Configuring WSNs can be more complex than wired networks.
 Environmental Impact: WSNs are susceptible to environmental factors such as walls,
microwave interference, and signal attenuation over large distances.

1.4 WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORK ARCHITECTURE

A Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) is a wireless network infrastructure that deploys numerous
sensor nodes in an ad-hoc manner. These nodes monitor system, physical, or environmental
conditions. Each sensor node contains an onboard processor responsible for managing and
observing the local environment. These nodes communicate with a Base Station, which serves as
the central processing unit within the WSN system. The Base Station is connected to the Internet
for data sharing and further analysis.
 WSN can be used for processing, analysis, storage, and mining of the data.
Applications of WSN:

1. Internet of Things (IoT): WSNs play a crucial role in IoT by enabling connectivity and data
exchange between various devices.
2. Surveillance and Security Monitoring: WSNs are used for surveillance, threat detection, and
security purposes.
3. Environmental Monitoring: WSNs track environmental factors such as temperature, humidity,
and air pressure.
4. Noise Level Monitoring: WSNs can measure noise levels in the surrounding area.
5. Medical Applications: WSNs facilitate patient monitoring and other healthcare-related tasks.
6. Agriculture: WSNs aid in precision agriculture by monitoring soil conditions, crop health, and
irrigation.
7. Landslide Detection: WSNs contribute to early warning systems for natural disasters like
landslides.

Challenges of WSN:

1. Quality of Service:
o Ensuring reliable and timely data delivery while meeting specific requirements.
2. Security Issues:
o Addressing vulnerabilities and protecting WSNs from unauthorized access, data tampering, and
attacks.
3. Energy Efficiency:
o Optimizing energy consumption to prolong the lifespan of sensor nodes.
4. Network Throughput:
o Balancing data transmission rates to maintain efficient communication.
5. Performance:
o Enhancing overall system performance, including latency and reliability.
6. Node Failure Resilience:
o Developing mechanisms to handle node failures without disrupting network functionality.
7. Cross-Layer Optimization:
o Coordinating interactions between different layers (physical, data link, network) for improved
efficiency.
8. Scalability for Large Deployments:
o Ensuring WSNs can handle a large number of nodes and maintain functionality.

A modern Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) faces several challenges, including:

1. Limited Power and Energy:
o WSNs primarily rely on battery-powered sensors with finite energy resources.
o Prolonging network functionality without frequent battery replacements is a challenge.
2. Limited Processing and Storage Capabilities:
o Sensor nodes are small and have restricted processing and storage capabilities.
o Complex tasks and large data storage pose difficulties.
3. Heterogeneity:
o WSNs often include diverse sensor types and nodes with varying capabilities.
o Ensuring effective and efficient network operation becomes challenging.
4. Security:
o WSNs are susceptible to attacks like eavesdropping, jamming, and spoofing.
o Safeguarding network security and data integrity is critical.
5. Scalability:
o WSNs must handle a large number of sensor nodes and substantial data volumes.
o Ensuring scalability to meet these demands is a significant challenge.
6. Interference:
o WSNs operate in environments with interference from other wireless devices.
o Reliable communication between sensor nodes can be affected.
7. Reliability:
o Critical applications, such as environmental monitoring or industrial control, require reliable
WSNs.
o Ensuring correct functionality under all conditions is a major challenge.

Components of WSN:
1. Sensors:
o Sensors in WSNs capture environmental variables for data acquisition.
o They convert sensor signals into electrical signals.
2. Radio Nodes:
o Radio nodes receive data from sensors and transmit it to the WLAN access point.
o These nodes typically include a microcontroller, transceiver, external memory, and power
source.
3. WLAN Access Point:
o The WLAN access point wirelessly receives data sent by radio nodes.
o It serves as a gateway to the internet for further data processing.
4. Evaluation Software:
o Data received by the WLAN access point is processed using evaluation software.
o This software presents reports to users and enables further data analysis, storage, and mining .

1.4.1 Sink Node

Certainly! In the mobile sync node architecture, wireless sensors move across the mobile sync
sensing area of the network to collect data from sensor nodes. These mobile sync nodes can also
act as sensor nodes themselves. Additionally, some systems incorporate data collectors installed
within the sensing area for efficient data retrieval

‘
 Figure1.1.1: Sink Node

Data Collection Approaches in Wireless Sensor Networks with Mobile Sink Nodes:
1. Discovery:
o This approach is mobility-independent and relies on a knowledge base.
o It focuses on identifying relevant data sources without considering the mobility of the sink node.
2. Data Transfer:
o In this joint approach, both discovery and data transfer are considered together.
o It aims to efficiently transfer data from sensor nodes to the mobile sink.
3. Routing:
o Routing approaches can be either flat or proxy-based.
o Flat routing treats all nodes equally, while proxy-based routing involves specialized nodes
(proxies) that assist in data forwarding.
4. Motion Control and Trajectory:
o The trajectory of the mobile sink can be static, dynamic, or a combination of both (hybrid).
o Speed and movement patterns impact data collection efficiency.
 1.4.2 Sensor Node

A sensor node is a device capable of collecting environmental sensor data, processing that
information, and communicating with other nodes. These nodes forward the collected data to a
central point for synchronization. Essentially, they serve as base stations or access points for data
collection and information sharing.

Figure1.1.2: Sensor Node

1.4.3 Topologies
There are different types of wireless sensor network topologies such as Bus Topology, Tree

Topology, Star Topology, Ring Topology, Mesh Topology, Circular Topology and Grid

Topology.

1. Bus Topology:
o In this topology, a node sends a message to another node on the network by broadcasting it.
o All other nodes see the broadcast message, but only the intended recipient processes it.
o Bus topology is easy to install but can suffer from traffic congestion and single-path
communication.
o It works best with a limited number of nodes; adding too many nodes can lead to performance
issues.
 Figure1.1.3 (a): Bus Topology

Tree Topology
In a tree topology, the network employs a central hub known as the root node for primary
communication routing. The root node is positioned one level below the actual root, forming a
star network. Essentially, the tree network can be considered a hybrid of both star and tree
topologies.
Wireless sensor network paths can consist of either single-hop or multi-hop communication.
Sensor nodes receive and share environmental information. After receiving data messages from
their child nodes, they synchronize and forward the data to their parent nodes. It’s crucial to find
an optimal short-path tree that maximizes network lifetime while minimizing latency. Although
this approach may involve slightly higher time complexity, it allows for distributed
implementations.
However, there’s a challenge related to load balancing at each level of the tree. This load
balancing can lead to communication between two nodes. If there’s a link break in the unipath on
the active route, communication may also be disrupted.

Figure1.1.3 (b): Tree Topology

Star Topology
In a star network, nodes are connected to a central communication hub, and direct
communication between nodes is not possible. All communication must pass through this central
hub. The goal is to find an optimal route from the source to the destination, considering factors
such as remaining battery power, minimizing the number of hops, and reducing traffic load. To
demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed method in balancing energy consumption and
maximizing network lifetime, we apply the same routing criteria in two distinct topographic
regions using the A-Star search algorithm and a fuzzy approach. We then compare our findings
from these different perspectives

Figure1.1.3 (c): Star Topology

Ring Topology
In a ring topology, each network node is connected to exactly two neighboring nodes, forming a
continuous closed loop. Messages circulate either clockwise or counterclockwise within the ring.
If a node fails, it disrupts the loop, potentially affecting the entire network. However, the
ringnetwork effectively handles traffic and congestion through dual-path communication
management
 Figure1.1.3 (d): Ring topology

Mesh topology

In a mesh topology, messages can follow multiple paths from the source to the destination.
Unlike a ring topology where messages travel in only one direction despite the existence of two
paths, mesh networks allow for greater flexibility.
A full mesh network connects every node directly to every other node in the network. On the
other hand, a partial mesh network involves some devices connecting indirectly to others
through intermediate nodes. This partial mesh approach provides redundancy and resilience in
case of failures, ensuring that the network continues to function even if certain nodes or
connections are disrupted

Figure1.1.3 (e): Mesh Topology

Circular Topology

In this topology, the circular is a sensory field. The sensing area has a center. The sensor node

senses the event of interest and transmits these data to the sink

Figure1.1.3 (f): Circular Topology

Grid Topology

In a grid topology, the sensor network area is divided into non-overlapping square grids of equal

size. Each grid must have at least one operational node at any given time. To prolong the

network’s lifetime, nodes take turns working within the grid. Within each grid, a designated node

serves as the grid head, responsible for forwarding routing information and transmitting data

packets. Routing occurs in a grid-by-grid manner. The primary purpose of grid-based multi-path

routing protocols is to enhance packet speed, manage network congestion, and efficiently utilize
 Figure1.1.3 (g): Grid Topology

RELATED WORK

Researchers have extensively studied wireless sensor networks (WSNs) with diverse objectives,
all centered around the critical goal of enhancing WSNs for better, secure, and efficient use
across various domains.
1. Security Focus: One research paper delves into WSN security, highlighting the vulnerability of
wireless networks due to their broadcast nature. Additionally, WSNs face heightened
susceptibility because nodes are often deployed in aggressive or hazardous environments where
safety cannot be guaranteed.
2. Operational Overview: Another journal provides a comprehensive understanding of WSNs,
emphasizing spectrum sensing as a fundamental aspect. It further explores the challenges
associated with the cognitive cycle, particularly the task of detecting spectrum usage and
identifying potential primary users.
3. QoS Support: In a separate study, the author evaluates Quality of Service (QoS) support in
WSNs. Unlike traditional end-to-end multimedia applications, mission-critical WSN applications
impose new QoS requirements. The unique characteristics of WSNs, including resource-
constrained sensors and novel communication protocols, present unprecedented challenges in
achieving effective QoS
4. QoS Support in WSNs: The author begins by examining techniques for Quality of Service
(QoS) support in traditional networks. They then analyze the emerging QoS requirements
specific to wireless sensor networks (WSNs), considering a diverse range of applications
categorized by data delivery models. Additionally, the author proposes non-end-to-end collective
QoS parameters. Challenges related to QoS support in this novel paradigm are also discussed,
along with an exploration of current research efforts and identification of open research areas to
encourage further investigation in this relatively unexplored domain.
5. Protocol Stack for WSNs: In another journal, the author delves into the protocol stack for
wireless sensor networks. Recent advancements in wireless communication and electronics have
 facilitated the development of cost-effective sensor networks. These networks find applications
in various domains such as health, military, and home environments. Each application area
presents unique technical challenges that researchers are actively addressing. The article provides
insights into the current state of sensor networks, discussing solutions within the context of
relevant protocol stack layers. Additionally, it highlights open research issues, aiming to inspire
new interests and advancements in this field

1.5 MAIN TECHNICAL ISSUES OF WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) face several technical challenges during deployment, which
extend beyond those encountered in traditional wireless ad-hoc networks. Here are some key
issues:
1. Energy Constraints: WSNs operate on wireless, lossy communication links without a fixed
infrastructure. The sensor nodes rely on limited, often non-renewable energy sources. To
maximize the network’s lifetime, protocols must be designed with energy efficiency as a primary
objective from the outset.
2. Fault Tolerance: Sensor nodes are often deployed in hazardous environments. These nodes can
fail due to hardware issues, physical damage, or energy depletion. Unlike wired or infrastructure-
based wireless networks, WSNs experience higher node failure rates. Protocols within a sensor
network should promptly detect failures and be robust enough to handle a significant number of
failures while maintaining overall network functionality. Routing protocol design plays a crucial
role in ensuring alternative paths are available for packet rerouting. Different deployment
scenarios impose varying fault tolerance requirements
3. Scalability: Sensor networks exhibit a wide range of scales, from a few nodes to potentially
hundreds of thousands. Deployment density also varies. In some cases, a node may have several
thousand neighbors within its transmission range while collecting high-resolution data. Protocols
within sensor networks must be scalable to handle these levels of complexity while maintaining
satisfactory performance.
4. Production Costs: Considering sensor nodes as disposable devices is crucial. For sensor
networks to compete effectively with traditional information-gathering approaches, individual
sensor nodes must be produced at very low cost.
5. Hardware Constraints: Every sensor node requires essential components: a sensing unit, a
processing unit, a transmission unit, and a power supply. Optionally, nodes may include built-in
sensors or additional devices like localization systems for location-aware routing. However, each
added functionality increases costs and power consumption while affecting the physical size of
the node. Balancing additional features against cost and low-power requirements is essential.
6. Sensor Network Topology: Despite advancements, WSNs remain resource-constrained
networks in terms of energy, computing power, memory, and communication capabilities.
Among these constraints, energy consumption stands out as a critical factor. Numerous
algorithms, techniques, and protocols have been developed to optimize energy usage and extend
the network’s lifetime
 TOPOLOGY MAINTAINENCE

Topology Maintenance is a critical concern in reducing energy consumption within wireless

sensor networks (WSNs). Let’s delve into the key aspects:
1. Transmission Media: Communication between nodes typically occurs via radio communication
over popular ISM (Industrial, Scientific, and Medical) bands. However, some sensor networks
utilize optical or infrared communication. The latter offers advantages such as robustness and
minimal interference.
2. Power Consumption: WSNs face significant challenges due to their limited power resources.
The small size of sensor nodes directly impacts battery capacity. Efficient energy utilization is
crucial in both software and hardware design. For instance, data compression can reduce energy
consumption during radio transmission, but it may increase energy usage during computation or
filtering. Energy policies vary based on the specific application; some scenarios allow for turning
off a subset of nodes to conserve energy, while others require all nodes to operate simultaneously

1.1 WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS SUPPORT SYSTEMS IN E-HEALTH

Researchers across computer science, networking, and medical domains collaborate to realize the
ambitious vision of smart healthcare. Integrating large-scale wireless telecommunication
technologies—such as 3G, Wi-Fi Mesh, and WiMAX—with telemedicine has already garnered
attention from the research community. However, further advancements lie in the harmonious
coexistence of small-scale personal area technologies like radio frequency identification (RFID),
Bluetooth, ZigBee, and wireless sensor networks (WSNs) alongside robust large-scale wireless
networks. This integration enables context-aware applications.
To achieve pervasive healthcare, leveraging existing mature wireless network technologies is
essential. However, equally critical is the development of unobtrusive small sensor devices.
These devices not only provide accurate information but also ensure reliable data delivery. The
linchpin connecting all these technologies is the application layer—the bridge between
caregivers, caretakers, sensor devices, and the entire system ecosystem. As the core of high-
quality healthcare services, intelligent, context-aware healthcare applications will play an
increasingly vital role
1. Remote Monitoring: The primary advantage of pervasive healthcare systems lies in remote
monitoring. By enabling real-time monitoring of patients during their daily lives, healthcare
professionals can swiftly identify emergency conditions in at-risk individuals. Moreover, people
with varying degrees of cognitive and physical disabilities gain greater independence and ease of
living.
2. Child and Baby Care: WSNs enhance child and baby care by providing a more secure
environment even when parents are away. These systems alleviate the dependence on specialized
caregivers.
3. Prototypes and Commercial Products: Both prototypes and commercially available products
contribute to the advancement of WSN-based healthcare solutions.
4. Common Properties: Many existing applications share common features. Typically, patients
wear one or more types of sensors, forming a Body Area Network (BAN). Simultaneously,
 environmental sensors create a Personal Area Network (PAN). These networks connect to a
backbone network via a gateway node.
5. Real-Time Monitoring: Healthcare professionals and caregivers can access vital health
information in real time through graphical user interfaces (GUIs). Alerts for emergency
situations are generated by the application, and this critical information can be accessed via
mobile devices such as laptops, Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs), and smartphones.

Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) exhibit diverse characteristics based on their deployment
environments. Let’s explore the different types of WSNs:

1. Terrestrial WSNs:
Terrestrial WSNs efficiently communicate with base stations and consist of hundreds to
thousands of wireless sensor nodes. These nodes can be deployed either in an unstructured (ad
hoc) manner or a structured (preplanned) manner. In the unstructured mode, sensor nodes are
randomly distributed within the target area. In contrast, the preplanned mode involves optimal
placement, grid-based arrangements, and 2D or 3D placement models. These WSNs operate with
limited battery power, but some nodes are equipped with solar cells as a secondary energy
source. Energy conservation strategies include low-duty-cycle operations, minimizing delays,
and optimizing routing.
2. Underground WSNs:
Underground WSNs are more expensive to deploy, maintain, and equip compared to terrestrial
WSNs. These networks involve sensor nodes hidden below the ground surface to monitor
underground conditions. To relay information from the sensor nodes to the base station,
additional sink nodes are positioned above ground. Recharging underground sensor nodes is
challenging due to their location. Additionally, the underground environment poses
communication difficulties, characterized by high attenuation and signal loss

Underwater WSNs:
Underwater WSNs operate in aquatic environments, covering more than 70% of the Earth’s
surface. These networks involve sensor nodes and vehicles deployed underwater. Autonomous
underwater vehicles collect data from these sensor nodes. Challenges in underwater
communication include long propagation delays, limited bandwidth, and sensor failures. Energy
conservation strategies are critical due to the nodes’ limited, non-rechargeable batteries.

Multimedia WSNs:
Multimedia WSNs enable tracking and monitoring of events using multimedia data such as
images, videos, and audio. These networks consist of low-cost sensor nodes equipped with
microphones and cameras. Nodes interconnect wirelessly for data compression, retrieval, and
correlation. Challenges in multimedia WSNs include high energy consumption, substantial
bandwidth requirements, and efficient data processing and compression techniques. Proper
delivery of multimedia content necessitates ample bandwidth.

Mobile WSNs:
Mobile WSNs comprise sensor nodes capable of independent movement and interaction with the
physical environment. These mobile nodes can compute, sense, and communicate. Compared to
static sensor networks, mobile WSNs offer improved coverage, enhanced energy efficiency, and
greater channel capacity

CONCLUSION

In ongoing and future research, it is crucial to address a significant challenge related to random

failures and intentional attacks on various network models. These failures may involve the

targeted destruction of critical nodes, especially those heavily connected within the network.

Developing effective solutions for this issue will unlock numerous opportunities across domains,

including e-health and beyond.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE SURVEY
In my previous presentation, I discussed the communication architecture for sensor networks and
proceeded to survey current research across all layers of the protocol stack: Physical, Data Link,
Network, Transport, and Application layers. A sensor network comprises a multitude of nodes
densely deployed near the phenomenon to be monitored. Each node collects data, with the
ultimate goal of routing this information back to a central sink. The network’s self-organizing
capabilities are essential, as the positions of individual nodes are not predetermined. Cooperation
among nodes is a fundamental characteristic, where groups work together to disseminate locally
gathered information to the user

2.1 Routing Protocols in WSN

In this section, the state-of-the-art for routing protocols for WSNs has been presented. Various
routing protocols can be classified as shown in Figure.

Figure 2.1: Routing Protocols

 2.2 ENERGY EFFICIENT PROTOCOL

Energy efficiency is a critical factor in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs). As networks grow

larger in size and shape, individual nodes consume significant energy, leading to premature node

failure. To address this challenge, various efficient routing protocols have been developed to

extend the network’s lifetime. Here are some notable energy-efficient routing protocols

LEACH operates in two distinct phases:

1. Set-Up Phase:
o During this phase, the network is divided into clusters.
o Cluster Heads (CHs) advertise schedules for data transmission.
o The goal is to efficiently organize the network and distribute energy load among sensors.
o LEACH ensures direct communication between each cluster head and the sink node.
o Clustering enhances the overall network lifetime.
o During the set-up phase, clusters are formed, and a Cluster Head (CH) is selected for each
cluster. The CH selection process involves sensor nodes generating random numbers between 0
and 1. If this generated number is less than a specific threshold value (T(n)), the node becomes a
CH. The threshold function T(n) is defined as follows:

T(n)=p1−p[rmod(1/p)], n∈G=0, otherwise

where p is the percentage of nodes that are CHs, r is the current round and G is the set of nodes
that have not served as cluster head in the past 1/p rounds

2. Steady Phase:
o In this phase, data aggregation, compression, and transmission to the sink node occur.
o LEACH aggregates original data from sensor nodes into smaller sizes for efficient transmission.
o Every node has a chance to become a cluster head, reducing the probability of sensor node
failure.
o LEACH randomizes the rotation of high-energy cluster heads, ensuring equal energy
consumption across sensors.
o Data fusion (compression) further reduces energy dissipation during data transmission.

LEACH assumes:

All nodes can transmit with sufficient power to reach the base station.
Each node has computational power to support various Medium Access Control (MAC)
protocols.
 Nodes in close proximity exhibit correlated data.

. 2.2.1 MODLEACH
MODLEACH represents a new and enhanced version of the LEACH protocol. Notably, it
introduces an efficient and qualified Cluster Head (CH) replacement scheme. Here are the key
features of MODLEACH:
1. CH Replacement:
o MODLEACH incorporates an improved CH replacement mechanism.
o A predetermined threshold level determines when CHs should be replaced.
o If the current CH’s battery power exceeds the set limit, it continues to function as a CH.
o CHs change only when their battery power falls below or exceeds the threshold.
2. Threshold Levels:
o MODLEACH introduces the concept of hard and soft threshold levels.
o In the soft threshold level, slight adjustments are made to recognized attribute values, affecting
node behavior.
o The hard threshold represents a specialized technology that surpasses the predefined threshold
value recognized by the node.
3. MODLEACHST and MODLEACHHT:
o These extended versions of MODLEACH further refine the CH selection technique.
o They adopt a reactive approach and yield comparatively better results than the original
MODLEACH.
o However, weaknesses in routing techniques persist.
o Notably, these routing protocols rely on single-hop routing strategies, which may not be suitable
for large-scale networks.
4. Density-Based Operation:
o MODLEACH operates based on the density of sensor nodes.
o However, this density-centric approach can introduce instability during the setup phase.

In summary, MODLEACH enhances CH selection but faces limitations in routing strategies,

particularly for large-scale networks

2.2.1 Multi-hop LEACH (MH-LEACH)

MH-LEACH is a routing protocol that employs a multi-hopping strategy to transmit collected
data to the base station (BS). Here are the key points about MH-LEACH:
1. Multi-Hop Transmission:
o MH-LEACH uses multi-hop communication to relay data from sensor nodes to the BS.
o Each sensor node sends its collected data to the Cluster Head (CH).
o CHs perform data aggregation and forward it to the next CH until it reaches the BS.
o The goal is to find an optimal path between sensor nodes and the BS.
2. Limitations:
o The primary limitation of MH-LEACH is the delay introduced due to multi-hop data
transmission.
o As more hops are added to reach the BS, energy efficiency is compromised.
3. A-LEACH (Assisted LEACH):
o A-LEACH introduces helper nodes for load sharing among CHs.
o In each cluster, a helper node is selected alongside the CH.
o Helper nodes, with sufficient remaining energy and proximity to the BS, assist in data
forwarding.
o During the routing phase, only helper nodes remain active, while other sensor nodes, including
CHs, enter sleep mode to conserve energy.

In summary, MH-LEACH addresses multi-hop communication challenges, but further

improvements can be made by minimizing unnecessary hops and introducing helper nodes for
efficient data routing.
2.2.4 Advanced Zonal Rectangular LEACH (AZR-LEACH)
AZR-LEACH is an enhanced version of the LEACH protocol, introducing improved Cluster
Head (CH) selection techniques and static clustering. Here are the key features of AZR-LEACH:
1. Network Partitioning:
o The network deployment area is divided into three logical partitions: advanced clusters,
rectangular clusters, and zones.
o Rectangular clusters are formed by dividing the entire network into fixed clusters.
o The base station (BS) is typically located at the center of the network area.
o Advanced clusters surround the BS, and nodes within these clusters are considered advanced
nodes.
o Advanced CHs receive data from their member nodes and other CHs, forwarding it to the BS.
o Due to their proximity to the BS, advanced clusters consume less transmission power compared
to other CHs.
2. Zone Formation:
o Zones are created by grouping rectangular clusters together.
o Each zone must contain at least one advanced cluster.
3. CH Selection Strategy:
o AZR-LEACH deviates from the LEACH routing protocol in CH selection.
o The node with the highest remaining energy within a rectangular cluster becomes the CH.
o All nodes in the cluster share their remaining energy information with the CH.
4. Traffic Load Equalization:
o The main advantage of AZR-LEACH lies in equally distributing the entire network area into
subareas.
o This equalization helps balance network traffic load.

In summary, AZR-LEACH optimizes CH selection and traffic distribution, contributing to

improved network performance.
2.2.5 Centralized Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy (LEACH-C)
LEACH-C introduces a centralized cluster creation technique, distinct from the original LEACH
protocol. While most operations remain similar to LEACH, the steady-state phase differs. Here
are the key points about LEACH-C:
1. Network Information Sharing:
o In LEACH-C, all nodes share their location information and remaining energy levels with the
base station (BS).
o Sensor nodes are equipped with GPS modules or other tracking systems for accurate location
data.
o This information exchange occurs at the beginning of each round.
2. CH Selection via Simulated Annealing:
o The BS calculates the average energy of all sensor nodes in the network.
o Nodes with more remaining energy than the calculated average become candidate nodes.
o Using simulated annealing, the BS selects a group of CHs from the candidate nodes.
o The selected CHs are then broadcasted to the entire network.
3. Deterministic Threshold Algorithm:
o LEACH-C maintains records of nodes previously selected as CHs.
o By centralizing CH selection, energy efficiency improves, and CH load is reduced.
o However, there is additional overhead on the BS.
4. Energy Cost Considerations:
o LEACH-C’s performance may degrade if energy utilization for communication with the BS
increases during cluster formation.

In summary, LEACH-C enhances energy efficiency through centralized CH selection, but

careful management of energy costs is essential for optimal performance.
2.3 SEP (Stable Election Protocol)
SEP is designed for clustered heterogeneous Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) and offers
several advantages over LEACH. Here are the key points about SEP:
1. Heterogeneity Consideration:
o SEP accounts for two levels of heterogeneity in sensor nodes.
o Nodes are classified into two types: normal nodes and advanced nodes.
o Advanced nodes have a higher probability of becoming cluster heads (CHs) compared to other
sensor nodes.
o SEP is particularly scalable in the sensor field because it does not rely on node positions.
2. Enhanced Stable Election Protocol (E-SEP):
o E-SEP introduces a three-level communication hierarchy.
o Sensor nodes are categorized as normal, intermediate, and advanced.
o Intermediate nodes have more energy than normal nodes, and advanced nodes have even higher
energy.
o By incorporating additional heterogeneity levels beyond SEP, E-SEP reduces energy dissipation.
3. Multi-Hop Routing with Stable Election Protocol (MR-SEP):
o MR-SEP enhances the SEP routing protocol by dividing the network field into multiple layers of
clusters.
o In each layer, CHs are selected, and member sensor nodes join CHs based on their distance from
CHs.
o Data transmission involves CHs collecting data from member nodes and collaborating with CHs
in adjacent layers.
o Upper-layer CHs act as super CHs for lower-layer CHs.
o While multi-hopping improves stability periods, overall network lifetime improvement remains
inconclusive.
 In summary, SEP and its enhanced variants address heterogeneity and energy efficiency in
WSNs, but further research is needed to optimize network lifetime.

2.5 HEED (Hybrid Energy-Efficient Distributed Clustering)

HEED, proposed by Younis and Filmy in 2004, aims to create a distributed and energy-efficient
cluster formation technique. Here are the key points about HEED:
1. Cluster Head Selection Parameters:
o HEED considers two parameters for selecting cluster heads (CHs):
 Residual energy of each node.
 Node degree.
o CHs are chosen based on a combination of residual energy and probability.
2. Cluster Head Formation:
o Nodes in the network independently evaluate their CH candidates to minimize communication
costs.
o CHs are selected when other nodes find them advantageous in terms of communication cost.
o HEED promotes long network lifetime and supports scalable data aggregation.

In summary, HEED optimizes cluster head selection, contributing to energy efficiency and
overall network performance

2.6 TEEN (Threshold-Sensitive Energy-Efficient Sensor Network Protocol)

TEEN, proposed by Manjeshwar et al., is specifically designed for reactive networks. Reactive
networks consist of sensor nodes that dynamically adapt to environmental changes. Here are the
key points about TEEN:
1. Energy Efficiency and Transmission Reduction:
o TEEN aims to increase energy efficiency by reducing the number of data transmissions.
o Data transmission occurs only when the sensed attribute falls within a specific range of interest.
o Each cluster in the network has a cluster head (CH) that sets attributes.
2. Thresholds and Data Transmission:
o TEEN employs both hard and soft thresholds for data transmission.
o In the hard threshold mode, nodes transmit data only if the sensed attribute falls within the range
of interest, minimizing unnecessary transmissions.

In the soft threshold mode, even small changes in the sensed attribute value trigger data
transmission. A Cluster Head (CH) transmits two types of data to its neighbors: hard threshold (HT) and
soft threshold (ST). Here’s how they work:
1. Hard Threshold (HT):
o Nodes transmit data if the sensed attribute falls within the range of interest.
o This approach reduces the overall number of transmissions.
2. Soft Threshold (ST):
o In soft threshold mode, even small changes in the sensed attribute value trigger data transmission.
o Nodes continuously sense their environment and store the sensed values for potential transmission.
o If the sensed value meets either of the following conditions, the node transmits the data:
 Sensed value > hard threshold (HT).
 Sensed value approximately equals hard threshold and is greater than or equal to soft threshold (ST).

o
3. Hierarchical Structure:
o TEEN follows a cluster-based hierarchical routing protocol based on LEACH.
o The network includes simple nodes, first-level CHs, and second-level CHs.
o First-level CHs are positioned away from the base station (BS), while second-level CHs are
closer to the BS.
4. Assumptions:
o TEEN assumes that the BS and sensor nodes have the same initial energy.
o The BS can directly transmit data to all nodes in the network.

In summary, TEEN optimizes energy usage by dynamically adjusting data transmission based on
thresholds, making it suitable for time-critical applications.
]

TEEN has the following drawbacks:

Nodes may have to wait for their designated time slots for data transmission, which can lead to

wasted time if a node has no data to send.

Cluster heads continuously wait for data from nodes by keeping their transmitters active.

APTEEN (Adaptive Threshold TEEN),

an enhanced version of TEEN designed for hybrid networks. APTEEN combines periodic data
collection with responsiveness to time-critical events. It offers the following capabilities:

 Historical analysis of past data values.

 A snapshot of the current network view.
 Persistent monitoring of an event over a specific time duration.

During each round, after selecting the cluster head, it broadcasts essential parameters, including:

 Attributes (relevant physical parameters).

 Thresholds (both hard and soft threshold values).
 Time schedule (using TDMA for time slots).
 Count time (maximum interval between successive reports sent by a node).

In summary, APTEEN enhances TEEN by addressing these limitations and providing additional
features for efficient data collection and event responsiveness.
 PEGASIS (Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems):
PEGASIS is an energy-efficient protocol designed for sensor networks. It builds upon the
LEACH protocol, introducing improvements to enhance data gathering efficiency. Here are the
key points:
1. Chain-Like Structure: PEGASIS organizes sensor nodes into a chain-like structure. Each node
communicates only with its closest neighbor, minimizing energy consumption during data
transmission.
2. Data Propagation: Data travels from one node to another along the chain. Only a designated
node transmits data to the base station, ensuring efficient communication.
3. Dynamic Leadership: The leader node responsible for data transmission changes periodically.
This rotation prevents overburdening a single node and maintains system robustness.
4. Global Knowledge: PEGASIS assumes that all nodes possess global knowledge of the network.
This facilitates easy chain construction using a greedy algorithm.
5. Signal Strength: Nodes determine their closest neighbor based on signal strength. Adjustments
are made to ensure that only one node’s transmission is heard at a time.

SPIN (Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation):

SPIN is a family of adaptive protocols that utilize data negotiation and resource-adaptive
algorithms. It operates as a data-centric routing protocol and makes the following assumptions:

1. All nodes in the network act as base stations.

2. Nodes in close proximity share similar data.

The central concept behind SPIN involves naming data using high-level descriptors or metadata.
Since all nodes can be considered base stations, information is broadcasted to every node in the
network. This allows users to query any node and receive immediate information. Nodes use
descriptive metadata to represent their collected data.
Before transmitting data, metadata is exchanged among sensor nodes through a negotiation
process, preventing redundant data transmission. Upon receiving data, each node advertises it to
its neighbors, and interested neighbors request the data via a request message. The specific
format of this metadata is application-dependent.
SPIN addresses the classic flooding problem by achieving energy efficiency through metadata
negotiation. It employs three message types: ADV (advertisement for new data), REQ (data
request), and DATA (actual data transmission). Here’s how SPIN works:
1. A node acquires new data and aims to distribute it across the network. It broadcasts an ADV
message containing metadata.
2. Interested nodes request this data by sending REQ messages, and the data is subsequently
transmitted to them.
3. Neighboring nodes repeat this process until the entire network receives the new data.

Among the various SPIN protocols, SPIN-1 and SPIN-2 stand out. These protocols incorporate
negotiation before data transmission, ensuring that only relevant information is transferred

Directed Diffusion (DD):

Directed Diffusion is a data-centric (DC) and application-aware protocol used in sensor
networks. Here are the key points:
1. Data Naming: Sensor nodes generate data named by attribute-value pairs. Four essential
elements define Directed Diffusion:
o Interests: Represent tasks as lists of attribute-value pairs.
o Data Messages: Named using attribute-value pairs.
o Gradients: Specify data rate and event direction.
o Reinforcements: Select specific paths from multiple options.
2. Data Combination: Directed Diffusion combines data from various sources, eliminating
redundancy and minimizing transmissions. This approach saves network energy and extends the
network’s lifetime.
3. Routing Approach: DC routing searches for destinations from multiple sources. In Directed
Diffusion, a base station diffuses queries to nodes in the interested region. The query propagates
hop-by-hop through the network. Each sensor node sets up a gradient toward the nodes that
expressed interest. Gradients are established from sources back to the base station (BS).
4. Data Flow: Sensed data follow the reverse path along gradients to reach the BS. Intermediate
nodes may aggregate data based on data message attributes, reducing communication costs.
5. Challenges and Benefits:
o Energy Efficiency: Directed Diffusion optimizes energy usage by selecting optimal paths
through caching and data processing.
o Drawbacks: Challenges include the need for time synchronization techniques (not easy to
achieve in Wireless Sensor Networks) and the overhead associated with recording information,
which increases sensor node costs

Geographic Adaptive Fidelity (GAF):

GAF is an energy-efficient location-based routing protocol initially designed for mobile ad hoc
networks but also applicable to sensor networks. Here are the key points:
1. Virtual Grid: GAF divides the area of interest into fixed zones, creating a virtual grid. Each
zone contains nodes with distinct functionalities. Nodes use GPS-indicated locations to associate
themselves with grid points. Nodes positioned at the same grid point are considered equivalent in
terms of packet routing cost.
2. Energy Conservation: GAF strategically puts some nodes within a grid area into a sleeping
state to save energy. This approach extends network lifetime as the number of nodes increases.
 By turning off unnecessary nodes, GAF maintains routing fidelity without compromising
efficiency.
3. Three States:
o Discovery: Used for neighbor determination within the grid.
o Active: Participates in the routing process.
o Sleep: Radio turned off to conserve energy.
4. Handling Mobility: Nodes estimate their leaving time from the grid and share this information
with neighbors. Sleeping nodes adjust their sleep time accordingly to maintain routing fidelity.
Before the active node’s leaving time expires, a sleeping node wakes up to become active.

IMPLEMENTATION OF GAF
class GAFNode:

def __init__(self, id, location, energy, grid):

self.id = id

self.location = location

self.energy = energy

self.grid = grid

class GAFGrid:

def __init__(self, id, nodes, master):

self.id = id

self.nodes = nodes

self.master = master

class GAFRoutingProtocol:

def __init__(self):

self.grids = []

self.nodes = []

def init(self):

for i in range(0, 10):

grid = GAFGrid(i, [], None)

self.grids.append(grid)

for i in range(0, 100):

node = GAFNode(i, (i % 10, i // 10), 100, None)

self.nodes.append(node)

for grid in self.grids:

if node.location in grid.nodes:

grid.nodes.append(node)

def route(self, packet, destination):

 shortest_path = []

current_node = packet.source

while current_node != destination:

for grid in self.grids:

if current_node in grid.nodes:

if destination in grid.nodes:

shortest_path.append(grid)

break

current_node = grid.master

return shortest_path

def update(self, nodes):

for node in nodes:

self.nodes[node.id].location = node.location

self.nodes[node.id].energy = node.energy

TSC (Triangular Sectors and Concentric Circular Tracks):

TSC is a clustering algorithm designed for energy-efficient routing in sensor networks. Here are
the key points:
1. Network Division:
o The entire network is divided into triangular sectors and concentric circular tracks.
o This division optimizes energy usage and reduces redundancy.
2. Phases of TSC Execution:
o Track Setup: Establishing circular tracks around a central base station.
o Sector Setup: Defining triangular sectors within the circular tracks.
o Cluster Head Selection: Randomly selecting a cluster head at the first level.
o Chain Construction: Forming chains of nodes based on similar transmission slopes.
o Data Transmission: Efficiently transmitting data within clusters.
3. Energy Efficiency Measures:
o Sensor nodes’ energy is conserved by avoiding unnecessary track computations by the base
station.
o Redundancy distance between a head node and the base station is minimized.
o The approach reduces data redundancy by breaking long chains of nodes into smaller segments.
4. Advantages of TSC:
o Reduced data redundancy during transmission.
o Improved energy efficiency in the network.
o Effective utilization of triangular sectors and concentric circular tracks.
 CHAPTER 3

LEACH PROTOCOL

3. Introduction

LEACH is a TDMA-based MAC protocol integrated with clustering and a simple routing
protocol for wireless sensor networks (WSNs). Here are the key points:
1. Objective:
o LEACH aims to reduce energy consumption during cluster creation and maintenance, thereby
improving the WSN’s lifetime.
2. Hierarchical Approach:
o Most nodes transmit data to cluster heads.
o Cluster heads aggregate and compress data before forwarding it to the base station (sink).
3. Cluster Head Selection:
o Each node uses a stochastic algorithm to determine whether it becomes a cluster head in a given
round.
o Nodes that have been cluster heads cannot become cluster heads again for a specified number of
rounds (P).
o Afterward, each node has a 1/P probability of becoming a cluster head again.
4. Data Transmission:
o Non-cluster head nodes communicate with the closest cluster head using TDMA.
o Nodes keep their radios on only during their assigned time slots to minimize energy usage.
5. CDMA Usage:
o LEACH employs CDMA to assign different code sets to each cluster, reducing interference
between clusters.

3.1 Properties of LEACH

1. Cluster-Based:
o LEACH organizes nodes into clusters.
o Each cluster has a designated cluster head.
2. Cluster Head Selection:
o Cluster heads are randomly selected each round with rotation.
o Alternatively, cluster heads can be chosen based on the sensor with the highest energy.
3. Adaptive Cluster Membership:
o Nodes can dynamically join or leave clusters based on their energy levels.
4. Data Aggregation at Cluster Head:
o Cluster heads aggregate data from member nodes before forwarding it.
5. Direct Communication with Sink/User:
o Cluster heads directly communicate with the base station (sink) or end users.
6. TDMA Communication:
o Communication within clusters is achieved using Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA).
7. Threshold Value:
o LEACH uses threshold values for various decisions within the protocol.

3.2 FUNCTIONING OF LEACH AND ITS VARIANTS

Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) employ various routing protocols, including hierarchical,

data-centric, flat network, location-based, and quality-of-service-based routing. Among these,

LEACH stands out as an energy-efficient hierarchical clustering protocol. However, there is

room for improvement to enhance its energy efficiency. Let’s explore LEACH and its variants in

more detail.

3.2.1 LEACH-A (Advanced Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy)

LEACH-A is an advanced version of the LEACH protocol that incorporates mobile agent
techniques for data processing. Here are the key points:
1. Objective:
o LEACH-A aims to decrease the node failure probability and prolong the time interval before the
first node dies (referred to as the stability period).
o It achieves this by using a heterogeneous energy protocol.
2. Synchronized Clocks:
o Each sensor node operates with a synchronized clock, allowing precise timing for each
communication round.
3. Cluster Head Selection:
o Maximum energy nodes are chosen as cluster heads (CAG nodes) for each cluster.
o These cluster heads play a crucial role in data aggregation and transmission.
4. Advantages of LEACH-A:
o Data Fusion: LEACH-A reduces the amount of transmitted information by fusing data.
o Energy Savings: TDMA/CDMA techniques enable hierarchy and efficient clustering, leading to
energy conservation.
o Robust Communication: CAG nodes continue to send data to the sink even after other normal
nodes fail.

3.2.2 LEACH-B (Balanced Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy)

LEACH-B employs decentralized algorithms for cluster formation in wireless sensor networks.
Here are the key points:
1. Decentralized Approach:
o Each sensor node only knows its own position and the destination node’s position.
o It lacks knowledge about other sensor nodes’ positions.
2. Cluster Formation and Data Transmission:
o LEACH-B utilizes multiple accesses to different nodes for cluster formation and data
transmission.
o Energy dissipation along the path between the destination and originating nodes is calculated.
o Based on this energy assessment, each sensor node selects its own cluster head.
3. Efficiency Improvement:
o Compared to LEACH, LEACH-B demonstrates higher efficiency due to its energy-aware
approach.

3.2.3 LEACH-C (Centralized Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy)

 LEACH-C (Centralized Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy) and its improvements:
1. LEACH-C Overview:
o LEACH-C employs a centralized clustering algorithm.
o During the setup phase, each sensor node sends its location and energy level information to the
sink.
o The sink uses this global information to determine optimal clusters, resulting in reduced energy
consumption for data transmission.
2. Advantages of LEACH-C:
o Fixed number of cluster heads (CHs) per round, ensuring stability.
o However, LEACH has varying CH numbers due to lack of global coordination.
3. Challenge with LEACH Protocol:
o In LEACH, CHs directly send aggregated data to the sink.
o CHs tend to die early due to energy loss during long-distance transmission to the sink.
4. TL-LEACH Solution:
o TL-LEACH improves upon this by using relay stations.
o CHs collect data as in LEACH but transmit it to the sink via an intermediate CH located between
them and the sink.

3.3IMPLEMENTATION OF LEACH PROTOCOL

 LEACH is a hierarchical protocol where most nodes transmit data to cluster heads.
 Cluster heads aggregate and compress data before forwarding it to the base station (sink).
 Each node uses a stochastic algorithm to decide whether it becomes a cluster head in a given
round.
 LEACH assumes that nodes have radios powerful enough to reach the base station or nearest
cluster head directly, but using full power constantly would waste energy.
 Nodes that have been cluster heads cannot become cluster heads again for a specified number of
rounds (P). Afterward, each node has a 1/P probability of becoming a cluster head again.
 At the end of each round, non-cluster head nodes join the closest cluster head, and the cluster
head creates a transmission schedule for each node.

Properties of LEACH:

 Cluster-based: Organizes nodes into clusters.

 Random cluster head selection each round with rotation or based on sensor energy.
 Adaptive cluster membership: Nodes can dynamically join or leave clusters.
 Data aggregation at cluster head: Reduces transmitted data volume.
 Direct communication between cluster head and sink/user.
 Communication via TDMA: Efficient time division for data transmission.
 Threshold value: Used for various decisions within the protocol.

Shortcomings of LEACH:

 Does not consider remaining energy when selecting cluster heads.

 Random and variable-size cluster formations.
 Uneven distribution of cluster heads.
 Single-hop communication from cluster head to base station may not be energy-efficient.
 Multi-clustering might not always be necessary, leading to suboptimal cluster numbers

Conclusion:
This paper provides an in-depth exploration of wireless sensor networks (WSNs), covering their
applications, network challenges, and inherent characteristics. Routing plays a crucial role in
WSNs, where energy efficiency significantly impacts network longevity. Among the hierarchical
routing protocols, LEACH stands out for its lower energy consumption. However, ongoing
research aims to further enhance energy efficiency. The paper also introduces various LEACH
variants, reflecting the continuous efforts to minimize energy usage in WSNs.
CHAPTER 4

RESULT ANALYSIS
In this study, we thoroughly examined the key features of various wireless sensor network
(WSN) technologies. Our analysis focused on factors such as the presence of one or more sinks,
node mobility (stationary or mobile), event-based formation, and the existence of a network
backbone. We critically evaluated the strengths and weaknesses of different metrics used in
WSN research, aiming to enhance and fortify the field.
When considering centralized versus distributed technologies, we found that distributed solutions
are preferable. These approaches offer scalability, autonomy for nodes, flexible deployment, and
the ability to adapt using self-organization strategies inspired by natural systems. In contrast,
centralized techniques lack broadcast or reception conflicts due to the central node’s
coordination.

However, several questions remain. How can we ensure that our application has sufficient
resources? Which technology—centralized or distributed—should we implement? Without a
precise framework for improvement, how do we choose the right approach? Can a combination
of techniques yield better performance? We conclude by summarizing the advantages and
 challenges of the presented techniques and highlighting the primary classification used in our
survey of sensor networks.

Now we compare the above mentioned routing protocols according to their performance
depending on different parameters. Table 1 shows the comparison.

Protoco Mobility Power Network Scala Resource Classif Data Query Multi

ls Management Lifetime bility Awareness ication Aggre Based Path

gation

LEACH Fixed Maximum Very Good Good Yes Clustering No No No

Based

TEEN Fixed Maximum Very Good Good Yes Reactive Yes No No

Based Clustering

APTEE Fixed Maximum Very Good Good Yes Hybrid Yes No No

N Based

Table 1: Protocols Comparison

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION
This paper reviews relevant research on wireless sensor networks (WSNs), focusing on their
development, design, and implementation. Routing within WSNs has been a longstanding
challenge, especially when compared to traditional wired networks. Various routing techniques
have been explored for specific sensor network applications.
The study classifies routing techniques into active, reactive, and hybrid modes, as well as direct
communication and flat approaches based on task and target applications. Additionally,
clustering protocols vary based on node participation styles and network structures (hierarchical,
data-centric, or location-based).
In Chapter 2, we delve into an extensive survey of eight routing protocols: LEACH, TEEN,
APTEEN, PEGASIS, SPIN, DD, RR, and GEAR. While no single protocol is universally
superior due to the network-specific nature of sensor applications, we evaluate these protocols
based on specific parameters. Our focus lies in modifying existing routing protocols to enhance
energy efficiency across the entire system.
 REFERENCES

 Rabiner, Kulik, and Balakrishnan proposed adaptive protocols for information dissemination in
wireless sensor networks (WSNs) at the Fifth Annual International Conference on Mobile
Computing and Networking (MOBICOM) in 1999.
 Heinzelman’s Ph.D. thesis at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) explored
application-specific protocol architectures for wireless networks.
 Ossama Younis and Sonia Fahmy proposed a hybrid, energy-efficient approach for distributed
clustering in ad-hoc sensor networks in 2002.
 A. Manjeshwar and D. P. Agrawal introduced the TEEN protocol in 2001.
 S. Lindsey and C.S. Raghavendra presented the PEGASIS protocol in 2002.

 H. Taheri, P. Neamatollahi, O.M. Younis, and S. Naghibzadeh proposed an energy-aware

distributed clustering protocol using fuzzy logic in 2012.

 R. Devika, B. Santhi, and T. Sivasubramanian conducted a survey on routing protocols in

wireless sensor networks in 2013.
 H. Lin, P. Chen, and L. Wang introduced fan-shaped clustering for large-scale sensor networks
in 2014.
 S. Chand, R. Kumar, B. Kumar, S. Singh, and A. Malik proposed the NEECP protocol in 2016.
 S. Arjunan, S. PothulaA survey on unequal clustering protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks J. King
Saud Univ. - Comput. Inf. Sci. (2016)
 Jing sun, Zhongxiao Wang, Hong wang, Xiaofen Zhang, “Research on Routing Protocols Based on
ZigBee Network”, IEEE Third international Conference on Intelligent Information Hiding and
Multimedia Signal Processing, pp. 639 – 642, Nov 2007.
 Ran Peng, Sun Mao-heng, Zou You-min, “ZigBee Routing Selection Strategy Based on Data Services
and Energy-balanced ZigBee Routing”, IEEE Asia-Pacific Conference on Services Computing, pp.
400 – 404, Dec. 2006.
 Jianpo Li, Xuning Zhu, Ning Tang, Jisheng Sui, “Study on ZigBee Network Architecture and
Routing Algorithm”, 2nd International Conference on Signal Processing Systems, pp. 389-392, July
2010.
 Mohamed Kasraoui, Adnane Cabani, Joseph Mouzna, “Improvement of Zigbee Routing Protocol”,
IEEE International Conference on Green Computing and Communications, pp. 788-793, Nov. 2012.
 Kwang Koog Lee, Seong Hoon Kim, Yong Soon Choi, Hong Seong Park, “A Mesh Routing
Protocol using Cluster Label in the ZigBee Network”, IEEE International Conference on!Mobile
Adhoc and Sensor Systems, pp. 801-806, Oct. 2006.
 C. C. Enz, A. El-Hoiydi, J.-D. Decotignie, and V. Peiris, “WiseNET: an ultralow-power wireless sensor
network solution,” Computer, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 62–70, 2004.
 W. Sun, Z. Yang, X. Zhang, and Y. Liu, “Energy-efficient neighbor discovery in mobile Ad Hoc and
wireless sensor networks: a survey,” IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, vol. 16, no. 3, pp.
1448–1459, 2014.
 A. Rajandekar and B. Sikdar, “A survey of MAC layer issues and protocols for machine-to-machine
communications,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 175–186, 2015.
 T. Zheng, M. Gidlund, and J. Åkerberg, “WirArb: a new MAC protocol for time critical industrial
wireless sensor network applications,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 16, no. 7, pp. 2127–2139, 2016.
 G. Dai, C. Miao, K. Ying, K. Wang, and Q. Chen, “An energy efficient MAC protocol for linear
WSNs,” Chinese Journal of Electronics, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 725–728, 2015.
 ] Yong Wang, Garhan Attebury, Byrav Ramamurthy, “A Survey of Security Issues In Wireless