2 ENERGY EFFICIENT PROTOCOL DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION IN
WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS Pragati Jain, (M.Tech Scholar)
Guide - Rajendra Arakh, (Assistant Professor)
Dept. - Computer Science Engineering, Global Engineering College, Jabalpur Abstract: - In there cent times, many routing protocols have been proposed in creasing the network life time, stability in short proposing a reliable and robust routing protocol. In this paper we study the impact of hierarchical clustered network with sensor nodes of two-level heterogeneity.
Wireless sensor network (WSNs) are network of Sensor Nodes One of current concerns is developing as table clustered heterogeneous pro to co prolonging the network lifetime with minimum consumption of battery power.
The main approach in this research is to develop an enhanced multi- hop DEE Courting protocol unlike DEEC. Simulation results show the proposed protocol is better than DEEC in terms of FDN (First Dead Node), energy consumption and Packet transmission. We propose an energy efficient adaptive scheme for transmission in high-speed networks. In this approach, the open loop is used for estimation and compensation of the quality of the link as a function of temperature. For each region and the current number of neighboring nodes helping to adapt the transmission power according to the quality of the link changes due to temperature variations.
Keyword: DEEC, FDN (First Dead Node) Wireless sensor network (WSNs).
1. INTRODUCTION
Evaluating network lifetime: The number of half dead nodes in DEEC and proposed DEEC i.e. IDEE Cat round 2000. The number of half dead nodes is 0 in DEEC and 28 in IDEEC the number of normal half dead and the number of advance half dead nodes in both DEECs. In it ially the number of normal nodes was 80 in DEEC and 70 in IDEEC.
The number of normal half dead is 0 in DEEC and
28 in IDEEC The number of advance half dead are 0 in both DEECs showing zero improvement in number of advance half dead nodes.
As sumed number of nodes was 100 in which we have take m= 0.2 showing number of normal nodes are 80 and number of advance nodes are 20 in DEEC and m1=0.3 showing number of normal nodes are 70 and number of advance nodes are 30 in IDEEC. Additional energy for DEEC and IDEEC is 300% i.e., a=3 been considered for both DEECs.
Table1 Simulation Results of Network Lifetime Performance measure for network
lifetime
DEEC IDEEC Improvement (%) (In number of nodes)
Half Dead Nodes (Normal half dead and
0 28 28
Advance half dead nodes)
Normal Half Dead Nodes 0 28 40
Advance Half Dead Nodes 0 0 0
Dead Nodes (Normal dead nodes and 80 42 38 Advance dead nodes)
Normal Dead Nodes 80 42 40
Advance Dead Nodes 0 42 0
Alive Nodes (Normal alive nodes and 20 58 38 Advance alive nodes)
Normal Alive Nodes 0 28 40
Advance Alive Nodes 20 30 0
Table 2 Simulation Results of Stability and Residual Energy Performance measures DEEC IDEEC Improvement (%) Stability(First node
dead) in round number 1189 1465 13.8 Residual Energy
(joules)at1500 round
0 0.09 18
2. PERFORMANCE MEASURES a) Network lifetime- This is
based on number of half dead nodes, dead nodes and alive nodes. Half dead nodes are de fine das nodes which are half dead and still half alive in comparison to dead nodes which are fully dead. Alive nodes are defined as nodes which are still alive after processing and further will participate in network operations. So there has to be increment in number of alive nodes and half dead nodes to make network alive for longer extent and decrement in number of dead nodes is required.
b) Stability (FND)-This is time till first sensor node died. The more the time in terval, more is stability of network.
c) Residual Energy- This defines the amount of battery powerconsumedbysensornode sperprocessinground.Lowerthe consumption and more the residual energy, better the network.
d) Packets to CH-Amount of data transmitted from nodes to CH.
e) Packets to BS-Amount of data from CH, nodes or In to BS.
3 ENERGY - EFFICIENT ROUTING PROTOCOLS
In WSN all the nodes have power source which provide energy to participate in the network. In the basic WSN the power source is batteries. As we know, the amount of energy that can best or by battery is limited and cannot be rechargeable.
So we should try to not waste this energy and use it in an optimized way.
the battery energy in an efficient way to in crease the network life time.
There for retarget of the proposed routing algorithm should been erg consumption minimization and network lifetime maximization. For evaluating the performance of routing Energy are Multi-hop Multi-Path Hierarchical routing protocol was developed by in ducing the features of energy yaw are routing and multi- hopintracluster routing[10].
The operation of the Energy aware Multi-hop Multi - Path.
Hierarchical protocol is broken up in to rounds where each round begins with a set-up phase, when the clusters are organized, followed by as teady-state phase, when data transfers to the base station occur. The below flow chart describes the overview of the protocol initially the user has to give the input which is in the form of number of nodes. For the nodes generated, their positions are randomly assigned and displayed. Once the nodes are deployed, every node uses the neigh bord is co very algorithm mtod is cover its neigh born odes.
Using the cluster head selection algorithm cluster heads are selected among the nodes. These cluster heads broad casts the advertisement message to all its neigh boring nodes and thus clusters are formed with a fixed bound size. Each node in the cluster maintains routing table in which routing information of the nodes are updated. Distributed randomized timeslot assignment algorithm method is used; it allows several nodes to share the same frequency channel by dividing the signal in to different times lots. Protocol there is some concept related to energy efficiency.
3.1GUI Simulation Comparison
GUI (Guided User interface) showing the comparison in number of alive
2 proposed DEEC (IDEEC) routing
scheme. The number of alive nodes shows in cement of 38 nodes showing increase in lifetime of network. BS of DEEC was at center where as it lies outside network field in IDEEC. The first node died at 1189 where as it dies at 1485 in IDEEC showing increment in stability. GUI been created just to show the processing results of simulation performed in MATLAB. The network consists of 100 sensor nodes deployed and omly in 100m*100m sensing field. The inference due to signal collisions id been avoided for performing simulation of proposed protocol IDEEC. The title of the GUI is
“Advance approach of lifetime Ethan cement in DEEC”. Two axes were considered for differentiating between DEEC and proposed IDEEC. GUI here contains push buttons, axes, static texts and variable texts.
Figure 1 GUI Simulation Comparisons 4 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FIELD AREA (X, Y)
We have taken Field Area X, Y, which is 100 x l00 meter squares for number of node covered in that area. This is taken in response of base paper so that comparison canbemadeon same area field for given number nodes
Figure 2 Counts of no. of dead nodes/alive node/ packet sent to base
station at 500 rounds in the network with cluster head count
Graph 1 represents dead node = 0 on 200/400/600 rounds Graph 2 represents Alive node = 100 on 200/ 400/ 600 rounds
Graph 3 represent spacket sent with energy 1.8 × 104 Graph 4 represents total number of cluster head selected on average1-3
Figure 3 Counts of no. of dead nodes/alive node/packet sent to base station at 1000 rounds in the network
with cluster headcount
Graph 1 represents dead node = 0 on 500/1000 rounds Graph 2 represents Alive node = 100 on 500/ 1000 rounds Graph 3 represent spacket sent with energy 3 × 104 Graph 4 represents total number of cluster head selected on average 3-4
Figure 4 Counts of no. of dead nodes/
alive node/ packet sent to base station at 2000 rounds in the network with
cluster head count
Graph 1 represents dead node =50 on 500/1000/2000 rounds Graph 2 represents Alive node =50 on 500/ 1000/
2000 rounds Graph 3 represents packet sent with energy 6 ×104 Graph 4 represents total number of cluster head selected on average 7-10
5 RESULTANALYSIS Rounds Dead
node Alive
Node Packet sent to BS
Cluster Head count 500 0 100 1.8×104 1-3 1000 0 100 3×104 3-4 2000 50 50 6×104 7-10
The proposed work has many features, which can be summarizedasitis a hybrid clustering protocol. b. The two scenarios are single-hop intra-cluster & multi-hop inter-cluster communications.
In the proposed protocols, CH (Cluster Heads) selection depends on fuzzy logic approach. d. The proposed protocols are centralized clustering algorithms.
6 CONCLUSIONS
intermediate nodes between CHs and BS.
The number of half dead nodes, alive nodes, and dead nodes showed 28%, 38%, 38% improvement respectively. FND showed improvement of 13.8 % and 18%
improvement in residual energy. The lifetime of network increased by 34.66% on an average of three parameters i.e. half dead nodes, dead nodes and alive nodes.
The BS is placed out of network field and rechargeable intermediate nodes inside the field with other nodes.
REFERENCES
1. Najam ul Hasan. COOPERATIVE Spectrum sensing IN COGNITIVE RADIO NETWORKS, 2006-NUST-MSPhD-ComE.
2. http://enpub.fulton.asu.edu/PowerZon e/FuzzyLogic/chapter%201/frame1.htm 3. L. Giupponi, AnaI. Pérez-Neira. Fuzzy- based Spectrum Handoff in Cognitive radio network, Centre Tecnològic de Tele comunicacion sde Catalunya (CTTC), Universitat Politècnica deCatalunya (UPC).
4. Dong Li, Xianhua Dai, Han Zhang. Joint Adaptive Modulation and Power Control in Cognitive Radio Networks, School of Information and Scienc Technology, Sun Yat-Sen University Guangzhou 510275, P. R. China.
5. Nouha Baccour, Anis Koubˆ aa, Habib Youssef, Maissa Ben Jamˆaa1, Denisdo Ros´ ario, M´ario Alves, and Leandro B. Becker. F-LQE: A Fuzzy Link Quality Estimat or for Wireless Sensor Networks.
6. Miao Maand Danny H. K. Tsan. Cross-Layer Through put Optimization in Cognitive Radio Networks with SINR Constraints, Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.
7. T. charles Clancy, William A Arbaugh, Measuring Interference temperature, Department of computer Science, University of Maryland.
8. http://www.scribd.com/doc/23492277/
85/Major-advantages-of-SINR-based- algorithmover-RSS-basedPauljkolodzy.
Interference t e m p e r a t u r e : A metric for dynamic spectrum, March 2006, Ph.D member, IEEE.
9. http://www.electronics.dit.ie/staff/amo loney/...2/dig-comms-ii-lecture-11- 12.pdf.
10. http://www.csgnetwork.com/tvfreqtable.
html.
11. H J Cheng, ZHSu RGuo, NX Xiong, WZGuo, Service-oriented nodes cheduling schemes with energy efficiency in wireless sensor networks.
Int. J. Distributed Sensor Netw. 2014 (2014).
12. H Z hang, Z Z hang, H Dai, R Yin, X M
Chen, in IEEE Global
Telecommunications Conference Distributed spectrum- aware clustering Base paper Proposed work
It defines only run
time of IDEEC It defines run time as well as Number of nodes dead of IDEEC It worked upon
reducing stability period, number of message, mean and
Variance of cluster heads (CHs),
It worked upon reducing inter mediate
nodes between CHs and BS
2 13. R M Eletreby, H M Elsayed, M M
Khairy, in International Conference on Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless Networks and Communications Cog LEACH: as pectrumaw are clustering protocol for cognitive radio sensor networks,(2014),pp.179–184.
14. MOzger, OBAkan, in Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM. Event-driven spectrum- aware clustering in cognitive radiosens or networks,(2013),pp.1483–1491.
15. CFLi, MYe, GHChen, JWu, in IEEE International Conference on Mobile Adhoc and Sensor Systems. An energy-efficient unequal clustering mechanism for wireless sensor networks, (2005), pp.604–612.
16. AO Bicen, OBAkan, Reliability and congestion control in cognitive radio sensor networks. Ad Hoc Netw. J.
(Elsevier).9(7), 1154–1164 (2011).
17. B Gulbahar, OBAkan. Information the oretical optimization gainsinen erg adaptive data gathering and relaying in cognitive radio sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. 11(5), 1788 – 1796 (2012).
18. G A Shah, VC Gungor, OBAkan, A cross-layer QoS-aware communication framework in cognitive radio sensor networks for smartgrid applications.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 9(3), 1477–1485 (2013).
19. GA Shah, OB Akan, Performance analysis of CSMA-based opportunistic medium access protocol in cognitive radio sensor networks. Ad Hoc Netw. J.
(Elsevier).15 4–13(2014).
