A survey on Clustering Energy Efficient Hierarchical Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks

Transcription

1 ISSN: A survey on Clustering Energy Efficient Hierarchical Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks N.Legapriyadharshini Department of Information Technology Adhiparasakthi Engineering college Melmaruvathur, India legasakthi108@gmail.com Dr.D Sivakumar Professor and Head Department of Computer Applications Easwari Engineering College Chennai, Tamilnadu dgsivakumar@sify.com Abstract The significant advances in wireless sensor network technology has provided low cost sensor nodes, which has the ability of sensing, processing and communicating capabilities. By networking a large number of small size sensor nodes, various applications in wireless sensor networks that connect the physical world to the realworld. Nowadays, wireless sensor networks are facing various issues like power and bandwidth constraints, less transmission speed and low storage capabilities among these the power efficient is a major issue. There are various routing protocols achieving the contemporary methodologies such as network flow, energy efficiency, Quality of service (Qos), security.till now, these routing protocols are not achieving the maximum range of energy efficiency, storage capacity, low computing power. In this paper, we give a small survey on energy-efficient hierarchical routing protocols and their classification in detail. network also vary rapidly. The wireless sensor network characteristics and their application requirements have a great effect on the network design objectives like network capabilities and network performance [3]. In WSN the design of routing protocols are challenging because of several network constraints like synchronization, node localization, low battery power, etc. In future a large set of research activities has to be carried out to overcome the various issues and energy constraints in wireless sensor networks. In this paper we discuss and survey hierarchical routing protocols and their classification briefly. Index Terms Wireless Sensors Networks, Cluster Head(CH) Hierarchical Routing Protocols & Energy Efficiency. I. INTRODUCTION The recent technological development in wireless sensor network (WSN) has become a hot area nowadays in research [1]. The wireless sensor network has a large number of thousands of small size multifunctional wireless sensor nodes which are capable of sensing, processing, storing, routing and also various computation capabilities [2]. Using these sensor nodes all the wireless sensor mobile devices are capable of communicating with each other to form complete infrastructure. Several hundreds or even thousands of tiny sensor nodes connected form WSN. The Figure.1 shows WSN. The vast potential of sensor networks, which enable the applications that connect the physical world to the real-world. Each node acts both router and host and the topology of the Figure.1 wireless sensor networks II. ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN WSN The Routing protocol is playing an important role in network topology in wsn for exchanging the information, locating the destination node and select the route to transfer the information through route [4]. For an efficient route for a un-interrupted communication, many protocols are suggested depending upon the various routing factors and types of networks. Depending upon the function and the type of application the sensor networks are categorized into proactive, reactive and hybrid. In proactive protocols, routs are computed automatically and independently, while in reactive protocols the nodes react immediately on demand based. Hybrid 1

2 protocols are the combination of proactive and reactive routing protocols. Many techniques are used in routing protocols among those the three main techniques are Flat, Hierarchical and Location-based Protocols. The Hierarchical routing protocols plays an important role in efficient energy consumption in wireless sensor network. Based upon the network structure and protocol operation the classification of routing protocols are shown in Figure.2 five major differences Hierarchical routing protocols like LEACH, PEGASIS, HEED, TEEN and APTEEN.The classification of Hierarchical Routing Protocols is shown in Figure.4 Figure.4 Classification of Hierarchical Routing Protocols III. CLUSTERING HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOL Hierarchical or cluster-based routing is utilized to perform energy-efficient routing in WSNs [5]. The cluster creation and assigning special tasks to cluster heads in sensor network can greatly contribute to overall system for low power, high energy efficiency and the data aggregation and fusion greatly reduce the loss of energy and increase the network lifetime by decreasing the number of messages sent to the base station in wireless sensor networks. Two layers used in the hierarchical routing protocol is one layer for selecting the cluster head and another layer for selecting routing.the Figure.3 shows clustering Hierarchical Routing Protocols. Figure. 3 Clustering Hierarchical Routing Protocols III. ENERGY EFFICIENT HIERARCHICAL ROUTING PROTOCOLS Energy efficiency is the first and most important factor in Hierarchical routing protocols. To attain low power & high energy efficiency in WSNs,our goal is mainly focused on the A. LEACH LEACH stands for Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy[4][6][15]. LEACH is the first energy-efficient, proactive adaptive clustering Hierarchical routing protocol in wireless sensor networks that was proposed [2] for reducing power consumption. Randomized rotation of the cluster base station is used in LEACH. The Cluster Head (CH) uses direct communication by forwarding the data to the base station (BS). LEACH uses clusters to lengthen the life of the wireless sensor network. In LEACH, the aggregation technique which combines all the original data into a s maller size of data is to carry out meaningful information to all sensors in the sensor field. In LEACH, randomize rotation of the high energy CH position is selected instead of static manner in order to give chance to all wireless sensors to act as CHs and avoid battery depletion of ind ividual sensors and avoid dying in a very short period of time. In LEACH operation is divided into rounds having two phases namely a setup phase to organize sensor network into clusters, CH advertisement and trans mission to the sink by minimizing the communication cost between sensors and their cluster heads[4]. LEACH uses single-hop routing so that each node can transmit data directly to the cluster-head and sink. So it is not applicable to wireless sensor networks deployed in large regions. This dynamic clustering brings overhead and reduce the gain in energy consumption. LEACH helps the sensors within the cluster disappearing their energy slowly, the CHs consume a large amount of energy when they are located further away from the sink is a great drawback in LEACH[4]. B.PEGASIS Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems means PEGASIS[7][15] is much improvement than the LEACH protocol. PEGASIS extends more features like distributing energy load evenly among the sensor nodes in wsn by using greedy chain based protocol in order to avoid gathering data from the neighboring node problem is completely reduced in wireless sensor networks. The two main tasks in chain formation in PEGASIS are chain construction and gathering data. 2

3 In chain construction the greedy chain based protocol is constructed by forming chains that is each sensor node sends and receive data from the neighboring nodes in the chain one node should be selected at one time only to the base station (sink). Greedy approach is used in chain construction. starting node to the node furthest to the sink all nearest nodes to this node is put as the next node in the greedy chain construction until all nodes are covered under the chain formation. A leader node or head node is randomly selected at each round among the sensor nodes[4]. All sensor nodes should posses global knowledge of the wireless sensor network, like position and battery power level. If a sensor dies due to low power on battery, the chain is constructed by the same greedy method of bypassing the dead sensor node in the network. Data are gathered while moving nodes from one node to the other node and aggregated data are sent to the base station. PEGASIS uses only one node to transfer messages to the base station so that network life time is increased with lower energy, but in the LEACH elimination of overhead by dynamic cluster formation is a major disadvantage in LEACH. Dynamic network topology is still required in PEGASIS in order to avoid the drawbacks, like energy status with neighbor nodes should be known by each node in order to route its data to the sink (BS). of some sensor nodes. The final CHs selected in HEED are well distributed across the network [9][14]. The main features of HEED is the distribution of energy extends the lifetime of the nodes within the network, thus stabilizing the neighboring node in the network after synchronization.the main drawback is limited battery power in the sensor nodes. D.TEEN Threshold Sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network Protocol means TEEN [10][15][13]. TEEN is a clustering hierarchical protocol and group sensors into cluster with each wireless sensor is led by a Cluster Head [4]. The sensors within a cluster report their sensed data to their Cluster Head. The Cluster Head sends aggregated data to higher level Cluster Head, until the data reaches the base station (sink). In TEEN the sensor architecture is based on a hierarchical grouping. Such as closer nodes form clusters and this process goes on the second level, third level, etc., until the base station (sink) is reached [10]. The various applications in TEEN are based upon the energy efficiency, data accuracy, and periodical time reply. In TEEN data-centric method is used with hierarchical approach. Most important features of TEEN is suitable for time critical sensing applications. Thus, TEEN protocol is not suitable for sensing applications is great disadvantage because without attaining thresholds for data the user cannot get clear report by getting periodic reports[10]. C.HEED HEED stands for Hybrid Energy-Efficient Distributed Clustering Protocol, which extends the basic scheme of LEACH[9][4]. Power balancing is achieved in HEED by using residual energy and sensor node degree as a metric for cluster selection. HEED operates in multi-hop networks [14]. Based on the primary goals which are proposed in HEED are a)prolonging the network lifetime by distributing energy consumption b)terminating the clustering process within a constant number of iterations c)minimizing control overhead, and d)producing well-distributed CHs and compact clusters. In HEED the combination of two clustering parameters the proposed algorithm periodically selects CHs. The first parameter is their residual energy of each sensor node and the second is the intra-cluster communication cost as a function of cluster density or node degree (i.e., number of neighbors)[9]. The first parameter is used to select an initial set of CHs while the second parameter is used for breaking ties. Thus, in HEED clustering, network lifetime is much longer than LEACH clustering, because LEACH protocol selects CHs randomly, which may result in a faster loss (i.e., death) E. APTEEN APTEEN stands for Adaptive Periodic Threshold Sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network Protocol[11][15][12] is an improvement of TEEN to overcome its shortcomings and aims at both capturing periodic data collections (LEACH) and reacting to time-critical events (TEEN).This hybrid cluster routing protocol, which allows sensor nodes to send their sensed data periodically and react if any sudden changes in the value of the sensed data by reporting the corresponding values to their CHs [14]. Both APTEEN and TEEN have the same architecture. APTEEN uses a hierarchical clustering concept of energy efficient communication between source sensors and the sink (BS). APTEEN also supports three different query types like a) Historical query means to analyze past data values[11], b) One-time query means to take a snapshot view of the wireless network; and c) Persistent queries means to monitor an event for a period of time. While APTEEN and TEEN sensors trans mit their sensed data depending upon the threshold values but in LEACH sensor trans mit sensed data directly to the sink through CH. Thus Over Cluster Head formation is a major drawback in LEACH[4]. The main advantage of APTEEN Protocol is the periodic data reporting to the user so that they know the complete network structure. The user is capable of changing the 3

4 time interval and the threshold values for the attributes. Thus APTEEN energy consumption is controlled by count time and the threshold values[11]. VI. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH The tremendous growth in wireless sensor networks gets a lot of issues for developing routing protocols. Routing Protocols needs robustness, scalability and energy efficiency in wireless sensor networks. The major issue in this paper is over head cluster communication, as well as delay in periodical reports, low battery power and also less Quality of service. Among various routing protocols we studied and surveyed clustering energy efficient hierarchical routing protocols with limited energy resources. In future a large set of research activities has to be done, to design a new effective routing protocol to enhance energy efficiency in wireless sensor networks. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to thank my correspondent, principal and my guide for their valuable support. I also thank Mr. K. Padmanabhan, M. P. Singh and D. K. Singh for their valuable suggestions and letting us to use their Hierarchical Routing Protocols notes. REFERENCES ideas for the 21 st century, Business Week, Aug , pp S. K. Singh, M.P. Singh, and D. K. Singh, A survey of Energy-Efficient Hierarchical Cluster-based Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks, International Journal of Advanced Networking and Application (IJANA), Sept. Oct. 2010, vol. 02, issue 02, pp Zheng and Abbas Jamalipour, Wireless Sensor Networks : A Networking Perspective, a book published by A John & Sons, Inc, and IEEEE, Shio kumar Singh, M.P Singh and D. K. Singh, Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks A Survey, International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES) vol.1.no.2, November A. K. Dwivedi and O. P. Vyas, Network Layer Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks:Existing Classifications and Design Challenges, International Journal of Computer Applications ( ) Volume 8 No.12, October W.R.Heinze lman,a.chandrakasan,andh.balakrishnan, Ene rgy-efficientcommunication Protocol for Wireless Microsensor Networks, in IEEE Computer Society Proceedings of the Thirty Third Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS '00), Washington, DC, USA, Jan. 2000, vol. 8, pp W. R. Heinze lman, A. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan, An Application-Specific Protocol Architecture for Wireless Micro Sensor Networks in IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications (October 2002), vol. 1(4), pp S. Lindsey and C.S. Raghavendra, PEGASIS: Powerefficient Gathering in Sensor Information System, Proceedings IEEE Aerospace Conference, vol. 3, Big Sky, MT, Mar. 2002, pp Ossama Younis and SoniaFahmy, Distributed Clustering in Ad-hoc Sensor Networks: A Hybrid, Energyefficient Approach, September Ossama Younis and Sonia Fahmy Heed : A hybrid, Energy-efficient, Distributed Clustering Approach for Adhoc Networks, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 3, no. 4, Oct.-Dec. 2004, pp A. Manjeshwar and D. P. Agrawal, TEEN: A Protocol for Enhanced Efficiency in Wireless Sensor Networks, in the Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Computing Issues in Wireless Networks and Mobile Computing, San Francisco, CA, April A. Manjeshwar and D. P. Agrawal, "APTEEN:A Hybrid Protocol for Efficient Routing and Comprehensive Information Retrieval in Wireless Sensor Networks", in the Proceedings of the 2 nd International Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Computing Issues in Wireless Networks and Mobile computing, San Francisco CA, April 2001, pp K. Akkaya and M. Younis, An Energy-Aware QoS Routing Protocol for W ireless Sensor Networks, in the Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop o n Mobile and wireless Networks (MWN 2003), Providence, Rhode Island, May K.Padmanabhan and P.Kamalakkannan, A Study on EnergyEfficient Routing Protocols in Wireless sensor Networks,in the Europena Journal of Scientific research, ISSN X Vol.60 No.4 (2011). 14 A review of power efficient hierarchical routing protocols in wireless sensor networks,sanjay Waware, Dr. Nisha Sarwade, Pallavi Gangurde / International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: m Vo l. 2, Issue 2,Mar-Apr 2012, pp Ankita Joshi, Lakshmi Priya.M, A Survey of Hierarchical Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Network pp 67 71,Department of Computer Science and Engineering,NIT Hamirpur,Himachal Pradesh, India 4

5 16. A. K. Dwivedi and O. P. Vyas, Network Layer Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks:Existing Classifications and Design Challenges, International Journal of Computer Applications ( ) Volume 8 No.12, October