IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

Enhancement in Network life Time in Wireless Sensor Network using LEACH Algorithm
Nitin Bansal1, Raj Kumar2 M. Tech. Scholar, Deptt. Of CSE, JIET JIND Email: bansal003@gmail.com
2

Assistant Professor Deptt. Of CSE, JIET JIND Email: rajshira@gmail.com

ABSTRACT In this paper we have proposed an improved routing algorithm using LEACH so that network lifetime will be improved. The main problem with LEACH protocol lies in the random selection of cluster heads. There exists a probability that the cluster heads formed are unbalanced and may remain in one part of the network making some part of the network unreachable. This problem is resolved by using modified EEP routing protocol. INTRODUCTION Advances in technology recently have enabled the mass production of small sized battery powered sensor nodes. A wireless sensor network (WSN) consists of hundreds or thousands of sensor nodes [1]. The Sensor nodes are tightly constrained in terms of battery power, processing capacity and storage [2].WSN send information to a central location called base station over wireless interface where data is analyzed and presented to useful applications. Size and cost constraints on sensor nodes result in corresponding constraints on resources such as energy, memory, computational speed and communications bandwidth. The topology of the

WSNs can vary from a simple star network to an advanced multi-hop wireless mesh network. The propagation technique between the hops of the network can be routing or
International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com Page 4

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

flooding. The main objective of our research work is to propose a better routing algorithm that will improve lifetime of network as well as total packets communicated to base station. The routing protocols in WSN are classified into three categories which are based on the underlying network structure. These are: flat [3], hierarchical [4], and location-based routing [4]. In flat routing all nodes play the same role and there is absolutely no hierarchy. In hierarchical routing protocols nodes are arranged into clusters to conserve energy. In location based routing protocols, sensor networks require location information for sensor nodes to communicate. Based on protocol operation, routing techniques in WSN are classified into Multipath-based routing, Query-based routing, Negotiationbased routing, QoS-based routing and Coherent-based routing.

Energy efficient routing in WSNs is a challenging task due to the inherent limitations in WSN. Due to large number of sensor nodes, it is not feasible to build a global addressing scheme for the deployment of large number of sensor nodes [2]. Furthermore, sensor nodes need to be self-organizing as they are deployed hostile region. Also all applications in WSN require sending of sensed data from multiple sources to a single location, base station and sensed data has significant redundancy in it as multiple sensor nodes in nearby region may generate same data [5]. The key challenge in WSN is to maximize the lifetime of network using energy aware routing techniques as it is not feasible to replace the batteries of hundreds or thousands of sensor nodes after deployment. Several clustering schemes and algorithm such as LEACH, DEEC, have been proposed with varying objectives such as load balancing, fault- tolerance, increased connectivity with reduced delay and network longevity. A balance of the above objectives can yield a more robust protocol. LEACH protocol and the likes assume a near to perfect system; an energy homogeneous system where a node is not likely to fail due to uneven terrain, failure in connectivity and packet dropping. But more recent protocols like SEP considered the reverse that is energy heterogeneity where the factors mentioned above is a possibility, which is more applicable to real life scenario for WSN. Thus, energy heterogeneity should therefore be one of the key factors to be considered when designing
International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com

Page 5

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

a protocol that is robust for WSN. A good protocol design should be able to scale well both in energy heterogeneous and homogeneous settings, meet the demands of different application scenarios and guarantee reliability. Conventional protocol designs do not address these situations. This research explores existing work done in this area. The goal is to present a modified protocol design that is more robust and can ensure longer network life-time while taking other performance measures into consideration. Mathematical modeling and computer simulations are used for proof of concept and testing. RELATED WORK W. R Heinzelman proposed LEACH protocol, which based on cluster structure and hierarchical technology. Relative to the traditional protocol, LEACH could save a greater degree of energy. For most sensor nodes, the short-distance communication saved more energy, in LEACH, the more communication was limited within clusters, only a few Next Node communicated with base stations long distance. It used adaptive technology and Next Node, node rotation technology, the LEACH was more efficient than the original class network structure; the whole WSN was more balanced on load distribution, and could extend the WSN lifetime greatly. In addition, each cluster could calculate locally and remove redundant data, reduce the communication burden of Next Node, node. As the energy consumption of calculation was much less than the energy consumption of communication, so LEACH could save energy greatly. But there were still problems in LEACH. Firstly, the node used power control when sending data, the energy consumption of node was not same. When Next Node, node election, it was considered that the number of Next Node, node in the past, without the energy difference between the remained nodes, leading to uneven distribution of energy consumption. Secondly, LEACH selected Next Node, node randomly, the number of Next Node, node closed to the optimal value could not be guaranteed. An enhancement over the LEACH protocol, LEACH-centralized (LEACH-C), is proposed, LEACH-C uses a centralized clustering algorithm, where an attempt is made to distribute clusters throughout the entire sensor field. As a result of dispersing clusters
International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com

Page 6

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

throughout the network, LEACH-C protocol records better performance compared to LEACH. LEACH-C operation can be subdivided into two phases: Setup phase: the base station receives information from each node about their current location and energy level. The nodes may get their current location by using a global positioning system (GPS) receiver that is activated at the beginning of each round. After that, the base station runs the centralized cluster formation algorithm to determine the clusters for that round. Before running the algorithm that determines and selects the clusters, the base station makes sure that only nodes with enough energy are participating in the Next Node selection. Steady phase: Once the clusters are created, the base station broadcasts the information to all the nodes in the network. Each of the nodes, except the Next Node, determines its TDMA slot used for data transmission. Then, the node goes to sleep until it is time to transmit data to its Next Node. LEACH offers no guarantee about the placement and/or number of Next Nodes. An enhancement over the LEACH protocol was proposed. The protocol, called LEACH-C, uses a centralized clustering algorithm and the same steadystate phase as LEACH. LEACH-C protocol can produce better performance by dispersing the Next Nodes throughout the network. During the set-up phase of LEACH-C, each node sends information about its current location (possibly determined using GPS) and residual energy level to the sink. In addition to determining good clusters, the sink needs to ensure that the energy load is evenly distributed among all the nodes. To do this, sink computes the average node energy, and determines which nodes have energy below this average. Once the Next Nodes and associated clusters are found, the sink broadcasts a message that obtains the Next Node ID for each node. If a Next Node ID matches its own ID, the node is a Next Node; otherwise the node determines its TDMA slot for data transmission and goes sleep until its time to transmit data. The steady-state phase of LEACH-C is identical to that of the LEACH protocol. From the review, it is found that by using energy aware efficient clustering and routing concepts the battery and computation overhead will be reduced. Solar aware routing within the clusters saves the energy of the battery powered nodes due to its routing capability only through the solar powered nodes. The soft computing based
Page 7 International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

approximation algorithms such as Fuzzy, neural networks and Genetic algorithm concepts can be used to have better convergence of clustering and routing techniques. Suitable policies and increased redundancy for battery operated sensor networks will increase the employment as well as the security level of the countries around the world. From the survey we conclude some point as: 1. The most common problem in Sensor Network is Network Life. Either the network is clustered of not, each node release some amount of energy with each transmission. 2. The energy reduction results the short network life. Lot of work is done in this direction respective to different protocols. 3. In a clustered network, the cluster selection is one of the major WSN protocol. In this literature we studied different approaches of cluster head selection based on distance, energy and other parameters. 4. Another problem we studied is the localization of nodes. The node placement in different order or based on different topology also affect the network life. 5. This paper shows that a network always needs the improvement in QOS in WSN. Lot of work is done in this direction respective to protocol modification etc. 6. The proposed system will improve the network life and total communication over the network.

PROPOSED WORK 1. The main problem with LEACH protocol lies in the random selection of cluster heads. There exists a probability that the cluster heads formed are unbalanced and may remain in one part of the network making some part of the network unreachable. 2. This problem is resolved by using the concept of EEP. EEP uses the concept of alternate Cluster Head called Vice Cluster Head. As a Cluster Head dies it is replaced by the Vice Cluster Head.

International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com

Page 8

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

3. But in case of Vice Cluster Head Dies, it does not provide solution for that and the network start reducing the energy very fast and finally the network dies completely. 4. The proposed work is the improvement over the EEP. In this proposed work we are trying to improve the network life. In this work, initially when the cluster heads are selected based on the energy and the distance parameters; we also select the Vice Cluster Head. 5. Now when the cluster head dies, it is replaced by Vice Cluster Head and new Vice Cluster Head will be selected at the same time. It means the cluster head will stay over the life of network. The decision of the Cluster head and Vice Cluster head selection is on the basis of Energy, Distance and Residual Energy. 6. The proposed system will improve the network life and total communication over the network.

In the original LEACH, the CH is always on receiving data from cluster members, aggregate these data and then send it to the BS that might be located far away from it. The CH will die earlier than the other nodes in the cluster because of its operation of receiving, sending and overhearing. When the CH die, the cluster will become useless because the data gathered by cluster nodes will never reach the base station. New version of LEACH protocol, the cluster contains; CH (responsible only for sending data that is received from the cluster members to the BS), vice-CH (the node that will become a CH of the cluster in case of CH dies), cluster nodes (gathering data from environment and send it to the CH).

SIMULATION SCENARIO Parameters which are used for simulation in scenario one:
International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com Page 9

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1
n= 50 P= 0.1; Eo= 0.6; ETX= 50*0.000000001; ERX= 50*0.000000001; Efs= 10*0.000000000001; Emp= 0.0013*0.000000000001; EDA= 5*0.000000001; EDA= 5*0.000000001; a= 1; rmax= 5000; do= sqrt(Efs/Emp);

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

These are the basic parameter taken for simulation of results in WSN. Here n is number of nodes, p is the probability factor, Eo is the thresh hold energy value, rmax is the no. of maximum rounds. In this scenario we are taking n=50 i.e no. of nodes in network is 50. The probability factor p and thresh hold value Eo and number of rounds rmax will be taken constant for all the three scenarios. Depending on these parameters we will get different graphs which consist of output of EEP and LEACH protocol. These graphs will show whether our protocol is better or not and if it is better then up to which size of network it will work better. In WSN network size and network topology is not fixed most of the time. So efficient working of EEP protocol with different network size is very much important. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com

Page 10

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

Now we will give the comparison graph of EEP with existing LEACH protocol for the network consists of 50 nodes. The graphs are given below:

Figure 4.1 No. of Alive nodes in 50 nodes network The first graph will be of no. of alive nodes in WSN. The life of nodes in EEP is more than the LEACH protocol. In LEACH the nodes are alive between rounds 1400 to 1500. Up to 1400 rounds the nodes are fully alive in leach. In EEP the nodes are alive between 2400 to 3200 rounds. The network life of smaller network is highly increased in EEP due the reason that time and energy is saved in cluster head selection as we have all ready a vice cluster head. The vice cluster head becomes cluster head once energy is below the thresh hold energy and next vice cluster head will be selected on the distance and energy factor. So, the life of network in EEP will be more than LEACH. The next graph will be consists of no. of Dead Nodes in WSN.

International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com

Page 11

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

Figure 4.2 No. of Dead Nodes in WSN of 50 Node The second graph will be of no. of dead nodes in WSN. The life of nodes in EEP is more than the LEACH protocol. In LEACH the nodes starts to die around round 1400. Up to 1500 rounds the network is fully dead in leach. In EEP the nodes are alive between 2400 to 3200 rounds. The network life of smaller network is highly increased in EEP due the reason that time and energy is saved in cluster head selection as we have all ready a vice cluster head. The vice cluster head becomes cluster head once energy is below the thresh hold energy and next vice cluster head will be selected on the distance and energy factor. So, the life of network in EEP will be more than LEACH. Now we will see the number of packets transmitted to base station in both LEACH and EEP.

International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com

Page 12

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

Figure 4.3 No. of Packets transmitted in 50 Nodes WSN The number of packets transmitted to base station in EEP is higher than the LEACH protocol. The reason of high data transmitted is that the network life is more in EEP than the LEACH protocol. In EEP the transmission is also for a longer duration i.e. up to 3200 rounds. So for a 50 nodes network the efficiency is more given by an EEP protocol than the LEACH protocol. Now in the next scenario we will increase the network size and see what results EEP will give for a larger network.

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE CONCLUSION

International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com

Page 13

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

The core operation of a WSN is to gather and convey the collected data to a distant BS for further processing and analysis. Gathering information from a WSN in an energy effective manner is of supreme importance in order to prolong its life span. This calls for use of an appropriate routing protocol to ensure efficient data transmission through the network. In this thesis, we have proposed an architecture modified EEP which extends the EEP clustering routing algorithm. The result of simulations conducted indicates that the proposed clustering approach is more energy efficient and hence effective in prolonging the network life time compared to LEACH. In existing system data transmission depends on current energy of nodes and distance between nodes. ModifiedLEACH algorithm works on two additional parameter residual energy of node and time stamp of packet transmission from. Modified-LEACH affords to conserve energy through multilevel clustering. If each node were to transmit its sensed data directly to the BS, it will deplete its energy reserves rapidly. So Next Node directly communicates with base station and approach to minimizing energy consumption which reduces transmission costs. FUTURE SCOPE The EEP of WSN has the scope of giving better results if the parameters are chosen suitably. The modified cluster head selection technique may give better results if implemented with other clustering techniques which have not been discussed in the thesis (e.g. Fuzzy C-Mean clustering).The network lifetime may also be improved if the clustering algorithms are made distributed as in LEACH. In all of the methods discussed above the energy parameter is taken into consideration only during cluster head selection (after clustering).The performance may be increased by considering energy as a parameter during clustering itself. REFRENCES [1] Jamal N. Al-Karaki Ahmed E. Kamal, Routing Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks: A Survey, IEEE Wireless Communications, 2004, vol.11 pp: 28. [2] Kemal Akkaya, Mohamed F. Younis, Energy-aware delay-constrained routing in wireless sensor networks, Int. J. Communication Systems 17(6), pages 663-687, 2004.
International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com

Page 14

IRJMST

Volume 5 Issue 1

Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

[3] B. Krishnamachari, D. Estrin, S. Wicker, Modeling data centric routing in wireless sensor networks, in Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, New York, June 2002. [4] J. N. Al-Karaki and A. E. Kamal, Routing techniques in wireless sensor networks: a survey, In IEEE Wireless Communications, Volume 11, pp. 6-28, 2004. [5] Kemal Akkaya and Mohamed Younis, A survey on routing protocols for wireless sensor networks, Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 3, pages 325 -349, ELSEVIER, 2005.

International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology http:www.irjmst.com

Page 15