The document provides an overview of routing protocols in wireless sensor networks. It discusses several categories of routing protocols including data-centric, hierarchical, and location-based. For hierarchical routing protocols, it summarizes LEACH, PEGASIS, HEED, P-LEACH, H-LEACH, and other variants that aim to improve energy efficiency. It provides brief descriptions of how each protocol operates and highlights drawbacks. The document also summarizes several data-centric routing protocols including Directed Diffusion, Rumor Routing, and their limitations.

1. A survey on Routing
Protocols in WSN
CHOWDHURY, MD SOYKET (13-23214-2)
CHOWDHURY, TAUSIF UDDIN AHMED (13-24300-2)
GAFFER SAMI-AL (13-24723-2)
AKTER, FOUJIA (12-22681-3)
RAHMAN, MAHMUDA (13-22990-1)

2. Index
 Background
 Wireless Sensor Network
 Energy Efficient Routing Protocol
 Data-Centric Routing Protocol(s)
 Hierarchical Routing Protocol(s)
 Location Based Routing Protocol(s)
 Conclusion

3. Background

4.  The future of technology is envisioned to consist of hundreds and thousands of
devices each with thousands of low costs low power, highly integrated wireless
sensor nodes to sense the environment and report back with data in unattended
mode.
 So the medium for communication would largely be dependent on wireless
communication and this will be the technology of future.
 A WSN has constraints in design as well as resource.

6. Wireless Sensor Networks

7. Elements of wireless sensor network
• Sink Node
• Sensor Nodes
• User Interface
• Event Detection

8. Structure of wireless sensor network

9. • All nodes have same initial energy
• Some advanced nodes have different energy level
Homogeneous vs. Heterogeneous WSN

10. Required Characteristics of WSN
 Large scale Deployment
 Heterogeneity of nodes
 Ability to withstand harsh environmental conditions
 Limited power Storage
 Dynamic network topology
 Ability to cope with node failures
 Unattended operation
 Communication failures

11. Challenges and Issues of WSN
 Energy Consumption
 Node Deployment
 Data Delivery Models
 Node Capability
 Network Dynamics
 Data Aggregation

12. Energy Efficient
Routing Protocols

13. Categories
WSN Routing Protocols
Data- Centric
Hierarchical
Location-Based
WSN Routing Protocols
Network Structure Operation
Flat
Hierarchical
Location
Query Based
Negotiation
Multipath
QoS
Coherent

14. 1. Data Centric Routing Protocol(s)
 WSN works with huge number of nodes which continuously passes data
from source to node or neighbor to neighbor.
 And it’s not possible for us to identify these nodes or assign different IP for
each node to identify them.
 To solve these problems data-centric or flat based routing protocol
approach is used.

15. Directed Diffusion Routing Protocol
• Interests and Gradients
• Data Propagation
• Reinforcement

17. DD Drawbacks
 Overhead of flooding network
 Overhead of periodic flooding
 Overhead of matching data to query
 Low Network lifetime
 Selection of node to form path
 Not Applicable in all fields

18. Rumor Routing Protocol
• Table for Event & Neighbor info
• Flood when event number is
small & query number large
• Agents are generated by Nodes
• Agents propagate information
throughout the network and
generates paths

19. RR Drawbacks
 Overhead of Maintaining table
 No Guarantee of Data Delivery
 Works when number of event is small
 Overhead of maintaining large number of agents

20. GRADIENT AND NODE REMAINING
ENERGY CONSTRAINED DD(GRE-
DD)
• Interests Generation with –
 Remaining Energy of nodes for retransmission Process
 From min hop count optimal delay metric generation
• Gradient Setup by Selecting next hop based on-
 Calculating min Node remaining energy
 Lowest Hop Count
 Not exceeding Gradient Diffusion Depth

21. GRE-DD Drawbacks
 Overhead of Calculating Max Diffusion Depth
 Setting Minimum energy at beginning
 Data Drop in-between might occur

22. ENERGY AWARE DIFFUSION (EAD)
• Generate Interests
• Gradient Setup & Remove Loops
• Selected path = min(Hop count) & min (Required Energy) & max(Path Energy)
• Forward Data in Selected path if Data = Interest

23. EAD Drawbacks
 Overhead of Calculating – Selected Path

24. Directed
Diffusion
Rumor
Routing
GRE-DD EAD
Energy
Consumption
Limited Very Limited Very Limited
Very Limited &
Balanced
Scalability Limited No Limited Limited
Location Awareness No Yes No No
Optimal Routing Yes No No No
Mobility Limited No Limited Limited
Multipath Yes No Yes Yes
Data Aggregation Yes Yes Yes Yes

25. SPIN PROTOCOL WAS PLANNED TO IMPROVE CLASSIC FLOODING
PROTOCOLS AND OVERCOME THE TROUBLES THEY MAY CAUSE FOR
EXAMPLE, IMPLOSION, OVERLAP AND RESOURCE BLINDNESS
Spin Routing Protocol

26. • Implosion
In this graph, node A starts by flooding its
data to all of its neighbors. Two copies of the
data eventually arrive at node D. The system
energy waste energy and bandwidth in one
unnecessary send and receive.
• Overlaps
Two sensors cover an overlapping
geographic region. When These sensors
flood heir data to node C, c receives two
copies of the data marked r

27. • Resource Blindness
In classic flooding, nodes do not alter their activities based on the amount of
energy usable to them at a given time. A network of imbedded sensors can be
“resource-aware” and adjust its communication and computation to the state
of its energy resources

28. SPIN Protocols
 SPIN-PP : a 3-stage handshake protocol for Point-to-
Point media
 SPIN-EC : SPIN-PP with a low energy threshold for Energy
Conservation.
 SPIN-BC : a 3-stage handshake protocol for Broadcast media
 SPIN-RL : SPIN-BC for lossy networks

29. SPIN-PP :
 3 stage Handshake Protocol
 Works in three stages (ADV-REQ-DATA)
SPIN-BC : a 3-stage handshake protocol for Broadcast media

30. SPIN Drawbacks
 If the node interested in the data are far from the source, data will not be
delivered
 Large overhead
 Can not ensure delivery of data

31. 2. Hierarchical Routing Protocol
 A number of routing protocols proposed based on cluster in WSNs
because of the scalability and energy efficiency.
 Sensor nodes form a cluster and there is a one cluster head in each
cluster. Cluster head is acted as a medium to transmit data to the base
station.
 Use multi hop communication and conduct data aggregation and fusion to
avoid redundant data

32. LEACH(Low-energy adaptive
clustering hierarchy)
 First and one of the most popular
hierarchical routing protocol for sensor
networks.
 Divided into rounds having two phases
each namely (i) setup Phase ii) steady
state phase.
 Using probabilistic method to elect cluster
head

33. Drawbacks
 Selection of a node is done based using energy and threshold conditions, not
amount of energy.
 low power node not used efficiently, more number of nodes has to be taken.
 Single hop clustering routing and cannot be used for larger networks.
 Nodes with low energy, elected as CH could cause energy holes and coverage
problems.

34. PEGASIS(Power Efficient Gathering in
Sensor Information System )
 A near optimal chain based protocol.
 A linear chain of all nodes are designed to collect data,
and nodes try to communicate towards the BS.
 The protocol is implemented in square, circular and
rectangular topologies successfully

35. Drawbacks
 Energy is not considered during selection of cluster head.
 Based on assumption that sensor nodes are static in behavior and all nodes have
global knowledge of the network.
 Required dynamic topology adjustment.

36. HEED(Hybrid, Energy-Efficient
Distributed Clustering)
 Extends the basic scheme of LEACH
 Using residual energy and node degree or density as
a metric for cluster head selection
 Aims to provide evenly distributed CHs throughout the
network

37. Drawbacks
 Nodes are not capable of location awareness.
 It cannot operate for different levels of energy considerations from the first
round.
 Performing of clustering in each round imposes significant overhead in the
network.

38. P-LEACH(PEGASIS-LEACH)
 A near optimal cluster-based chain
protocol that is an improvement over
PEGASIS and LEACH both.
 Use the cluster formation technique of
LEACH in the chain based architecture of
PEGASIS.
 The system will have higher lifetime, low
energy consumption, and can also deal
with a dynamic system.

39. Flow Chart of P-LEACH Protocol

40. Drawbacks
 Each Node uses its limited reserves of energy that causes depletion.
 If leader node dies, the data transmission between base station and leader
node will be cut off.
 Not fit for large scale network.

41. H-LEACH(HEED-LEACH)
 Uses residual and maximum energy of the nodes to elect a channel head
for each round.
 Find the life time of the nodes in terms of rounds.
 Considered threshold and energy conditions

42. Setup phase and Steady state

43. Drawbacks
 Large scale development do not be possible.
 Used probabilistic value like LEACH to elect cluster head.
 Don’t have location awareness.

44. LEACH PEGASIS HEED P-LEACH H-LEACH
Energy
Consumption
High Low High Low Medium
Scalability Limited Limited Limited Yes Yes
Location Awareness No No No No No
Mobility Fixed BS Fixed BS Fixed BS Fixed BS Fixed BS
Multipath Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Data Aggregation Yes Limited Yes Yes Yes
QoS No No No No No

45. Hierarchical-PEGASIS
(Data Gathering in Sensor Networks using the Energy*Delay Metric)
 Decrease the delay of transmission
packets to the BS.
 Avoid collisions and signal interference
among sensors

46. Drawback
 Not suitable for heavy-loaded network.
 In WSN there are n number of nodes, delay in data transmission is very obvious.
So in this case PEGASIS and H-PEGASIS do not so scale good.

47. PDCH(PEGASIS with double Cluster
Head)protocol
PDCH introduced because
 In PEGASIS there is high possibility it
will always build a long chain so that
transmission delay occur
 although one CH selected randomly
which is not convenient for balanced
load
PDCH balances the load of every node
and increase network lifetime
Figure: Double cluster head method

48. Drawbacks
 Selection of two cluster heads might increase network overhead in terms
of delay.
 Nodes of secondary chain don’t get a chance to participate in the selection
of main cluster head.

49. Improved Energy Efficient PEGASIS
Based (IEEPB) Protocol
IEEPB is an improved chain based routing
algorithm
It contain three stages:-
• Chain construction phase
• Leader selection phase
• Data transmission phase
Data transmission phase
It initialize a packet each node transfers its data to the
nearby node of the chain. The nearby node fuses its data
with previous node data and sends it to another node to BS
Leader selection phase
IEEPB selects the new leader according to the combined
weight in each round
Chain construction phase
initializes a network parameter

50. PEGASIS H-PEGASIS PDCH IEEPB
Energy
Consumption
Limited Limited Low Very low
Scalability Limited Limited Good Better
Location Awareness No Yes Yes Yes
Mobility Fixed BS No No Fixed
Multipath No No Yes No
Data Aggregation
Limited Limited Good Better
QoS No No No No

51. 3. Location Based Routing Protocol(s)
 Location information is needed in most of the routing protocols for sensor nodes.
 This is useful to find out the energy consumption of two particular nodes by
calculating distance.
 Since, there is no addressing scheme for sensor networks like IP-addresses and
they are spatially deployed on a region, location information can be utilized in
routing data in an energy efficient way

52. Basic GAF Operation:
• Discovery
• Active
• Sleep
GAF (Geographic Adaptive Fidelity)

54. Drawbacks of GAF
 Non-multitasking
 Redundant
 Scalability Long

55. Step 1: Dividing into virtual grids
Step 2: Selecting cluster head
Dynamic-division GAF (DGAF)

56. Drawbacks of DGAF
 Performance Problem
 Scalability Long

57. a) “On” period {Doze mode}
b) “Off” period {Sleep mode}
Sleep Doze Coordination Protocol (SDC)

58. • Select randomly.
• Node having maximum battery power is selected.
• Node that has slept the longest ever is selected.

59. Drawbacks of SDC
 Scalability long
 Energy Inefficient

60. • Discovery
• Sleeping
• Active
Energy Efficient Geographic
Adaptive Fidelity (EFGAF)

62. Drawbacks of EFGAF
 Working One Time
 Data can be lost

63. GAF DGAF SDC EFGAF
Energy
Consumption
Limited Limited High High
Redundant Data High Limited Low Low
Scalability Good Good High High
Power User Limited Limited High High
Reliability Good Good High High
Environment Monitoring Good Limited Good Good
QoS Low Limited Good High

64. Conclusion

65. Energy Aware Diffusion(EAD) is Better Compared to DD, GRE-DD, RR & Spin:
• Balanced Power Consumption
P-LEACH is Better Compared to H-LEACH, PEGASIS, H-PEGASIS, HEED,
LEACH, PDCH, IEEPB
• Chain Based, Formation technique within cluster for data transmission
• Dynamic
Energy Efficient Geographic Fidelity is Better Compared to GAF, DGAF & SDC
• Energy consumption & increase network life time.
- when its aided routing.

66. Thank you! 