Network Protocols and Algorithms
ISSN 1943-3581
2016, Vol. 8, No. 3
Consumption of Energy and Routing Protocols in
Wireless Sensor Network
Ridha Azizi
Computer Technology Department,
High Institute of Technological Studies of Sousse (ISET),
Sousse, Tunisia BP 135 Cité Riadh ,Sousse Tunisia 4023
Tel. (216) 98202807
Email: azizi_ridha@yahoo.fr
Received: October 11, 2016 Accepted: November 28, 2016 Published: November 30, 2016
DOI: 10.5296/npa.v8i3.10257 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/npa.v8i3.10257
Abstract
Extend the life of a wireless sensor network (WSN) is a fundamental challenge, as they have
a limited supply. Multiple protocols and approaches have been proposed to minimize power
consumption. Routing protocols and especially the hierarchical approach is one of the
techniques used to minimize energy consumption and to improve the duration of network life.
In this paper we propose a new approach to transfer and select the CH (Cluster Head).
ART-LEACH (Advanced Routing Transfer- Low-Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy) is a
self-organizing protocol based on clustering. Our approach is to use energy more evenly the
selected nodes as CH. We evaluated the performance of LEACH (Low-Energy Adaptive
Clustering Hierarchy) and IB-LEACH (Improved and Balanced Low Energy Adaptive
Clustering Hierarchy) protocol with the proposed new approach using MATLAB as a
simulation tool. The simulation results showed that our proposal provides a reduction in
energy consumption and increase the duration of network life.
Keywords : wireless sensor networks, routing protocol; clustering techniques LEACH;
IB-LEACH; energy optimization.
www.macrothink.org/npa
76
Network Protocols and Algorithms
ISSN 1943-3581
2016, Vol. 8, No. 3
1 . Introduction
Wireless sensor networks (WSN) consist of a set of very small devices, called sensor
nodes, ranging from tens of elements to several thousand. In this type of network, each node
is able to react in case of need by sending the information collected in one or more collection
points, using a wireless connection.[1] [2] [3]. The sensor is provided with an energy source
to power its components. However, due to its small size, energy resources at its disposal is
limited and generally irreplaceable. To prolong the life of the network, several routing
approaches have been proposed.
In this article we study the different routing protocols and existing improvements in a
first section. In Section 2 we present a comparative study of different protocols. In Section 3,
we present the existing improvements. In Section 4 we will detail the proposed improvement
and results. Finally, Section 5 ends with a conclusion.
2 . Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks
Routing protocols are actually split into three families: the routing protocols given
central, hierarchical or geographical. In what follows, we cite a set of hierarchical routing
protocols most widespread in applications of wireless sensor networks. It gives a brief
overview on the principle of each:
2.1 TEEN: Threshold-sensitive Energy Efficient sensor Network protocol:
The network architecture is based on a hierarchical grouping several levels where the
nearest nodes form clusters. Then this clustering process proceeds to the second level until
the base station is reached [4,11].
2.2 APTEEN: Adaptive Threshold-sensitive Energy Efficient sensor Network protocol
It is a hybrid protocol that changes the frequency and threshold values used in TEEN
according to user needs and the type of application [5].
2.3 HEED: Hybrid, Eenergy-Efficient, Distributed approach
HEED selects the cluster-heads in a hybrid test involving the remaining energy of the nodes
and a second parameter such as the degree of the nodes. It aims to achieve a uniform distribution
of cluster-heads in the network and to generate clusters balanced in size [6].
2.4 LEACH protocol: Low-Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy
Form clusters to minimize power dissipation [7]
2.5 IB- LEACH protocol: Improved and Balanced Low Energy Adaptive Clustering
Hierarchy
Uses gateways to reduce the cluster-head of energy consumption [8].
www.macrothink.org/npa
77
Network Protocols and Algorithms
ISSN 1943-3581
2016, Vol. 8, No. 3
3 . Comparison of hierarchical routing protocols
3.1 The comparison criteria
• Efficiency: Balance the load between the nodes of the network, improves the energy
efficiency of sensor nodes, extend the life of networks and improve communication
efficiency, which increases the period of stability and duration of network life. [8,3]
• Scalability: Scalability is an important factor in wireless sensor networks. A network
zone is not always static, it changes according to the needs of users. All nodes in the area
of network must be scalable and be able to adapt to changes in the structure of the network
depending on the user. [9,2]
• The stability of clusters: The effectiveness of a clustering algorithm is evaluated in terms
of the number of clusters formed and stability of the clusters according to the node
mobility. The clustering process is mainly to optimize the maintenance information of the
network topology and reduce the overhead of broadcasting for the discovery of paths.
[10,11]
• Load Balancing: the main function of a WSN is to collect relevant information from an
area of interest. Some applications, such as environmental control, need the WSN works as
long as possible. Thus, the extension of the life of the WSN is important objective of each
routing protocol. A poor load balancing will result in the rapid depletion of energy of some
sensor nodes, as a result of a short lifetime of the WSN. A good routing protocol should
ensure energy balancing to prolong the lifetime of WSN. [12]
3.2 The comparative table
Table 1 shows the classification of proposed protocols for WSNs, according to four
criteria has been described previously (Energy efficiency, scalability, stability clusters, load
balancing) [13,14].
Table 1 : Comparison of different hierarchical routing protocols in WSNs
Protocols Energy Efficiency Stability clusters Load Balancing scalability
TEEN high high acceptable low
APTEEN Moderate Low Very Low Moderate
HEED moderate moderate high low
LEACH High moderate moderate strong
IB-LEACH High moderate moderate Strong
3.3 Advantages and disadvantages
Table 2 shows the advantages and disadvantages of routing protocols in WSNs.
www.macrothink.org/npa
78
Network Protocols and Algorithms
ISSN 1943-3581
2016, Vol. 8, No. 3
Table 2 : Advantages and Disadvantages of routing protocols in WSNs
Protocols Advantages Disadvantages
TEEN
-Energy consumption in this protocol is
lower than in proactive protocols or
those that transmit data
periodically[15,1]
-If the thresholds HT and ST are not received, the nodes will
never communicate, and no data will be transmitted to the
user and the base station does not know which nodes have
exhausted their energy
- TEEN is not suitable for applications that require periodic
mailings data
APTEEN
-Provides flexibility that allows the user
to select the CT time
interval, and
threshold values HT and ST so that the
power consumption is controlled by the
variation of these parameters
- Requires additional complexity to implement functions of
thresholds and time periods CT.
-The additional cost and complexity associated with the
formation of clusters at several levels are quite high [16]
HEED
- Ensures that all sensors are part of a
single cluster, and the cluster heads are
well distributed
- Extends the life of the nodes within the
network
- Creates widespread clusters
- The Total evaluation presents some difficulty, because of
the absence of any central control
- Does not specify a particular protocol to be used for
communication between cluster-heads and the base station
- Clustering topology does not achieve
minimum energy
consumption in the intra-cluster communication
-The clusters generated are not balanced in size.
LEACH
-It Provides scalability in network by
limiting most communications
within the different clusters.
-The Cluster-heads aggregate or merge
the information gathered by sensor
nodes, which helps to limit the traffic
generated in the network.
-The Role of the distributive property of
CH between cluster members.
-This Significantly based on CHs rather than members of the
cluster nodes to communicate with the base station. Thus, he
incurs robustness problems such as failure of CHs.
-The CHs farthest from the base station quickly die with
respect to those
are close to the station.
-We Can not be CH during a round if the random numbers
generated by all
network nodes are higher than the probability T (n). [17]
IB-LEACH
- Balanced energy dissipation
- Lifetime of network is extended
- More stable region that LEACH
- The use of the bridge and CH reduce
the phenomenon of the rapid death of
CH caused
by excessive energy
consumption
- Random Location bridges does not ensure an efficient
energy balance.
- The sensor node sends its data at the same CH if it is closer
to the base station or gateway.
- The choice of the bridge is based solely on energy without
counting the distance which affects energy consumption
The study and analysis of the major routing protocols for WSNs, allowed us to offer our
own routing protocol based on the assumptions of IB-LEACH whose main objective is the
extension of the lifespan the network and the effective management of energy consumption.
www.macrothink.org/npa
79
Network Protocols and Algorithms
ISSN 1943-3581
2016, Vol. 8, No. 3
4 . Improvements proposed
4.1 Network Architecture
ART-LEACH (Advanced Routing Transfer- Low-Energy Adaptive Clustering
Hierarchy) is our protocol is a self-organizing protocol based on clustering as shown in
Figure 1, which is to partition the network into groups (clusters). The nodes send their data to
the cluster-heads (CH), which in turn send the data to the base station (BS) via the gateway
level 1 and 2.
Figure1 : Network Model with ART-LEACH
The aim is to promote the nodes with more energy and close to the SB and belong to a
well-defined zone (the zone gateways) to become level 1 gateways and seek advanced node
that is located between the gateway level 1 and SB to become a level 2 gateway
4.2 Election of gateways level 1
Both parameters were combined (energy and distance) for calculating a threshold
according to which the selected gateway level 1.
This threshold is calculated as follows:
threshold = E / d (1)
www.macrothink.org/npa
80