Hindawi

Journal of Sensors
Volume 2021, Article ID 7459368, 18 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/7459368

Review Article
Hierarchical Routing Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks:
Functional and Performance Analysis

Muhammad K. Khan,1,2 Muhammad Shiraz,2 Qaisar Shaheen ,3 Shariq Aziz Butt,4

Rizwan Akhtar,5 Muazzam A. Khan,6 and Wang Changda 1
1
School of Computer Science and Communication Engineering, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China
2
Department of Computer Science, Federal Urdu University of Arts, Science and Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan
3
Department of Computer Science & Information Technology, Superior College, Lahore, Pakistan
4
Department of Computer Science, University of Lahore, Pakistan
5
Department of IT and Computer Science, Pak-Austria Fachhochschule Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology,
Haripur, Pakistan
6
Department of Computer Science, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan

Correspondence should be addressed to Qaisar Shaheen; [email protected]

and Wang Changda; [email protected]

Received 28 February 2020; Revised 26 March 2021; Accepted 24 April 2021; Published 8 May 2021

Academic Editor: Antonio Lazaro

Copyright © 2021 Muhammad K. Khan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.

Wireless sensor network (WSN) comprises of spatially distributed autonomous sensors to monitor physical or environmental
conditions, such as temperature, sound, and pressure, and to cooperatively forward the collected information to the destination
through the network infrastructure. As sensor nodes are energy constraint devices, therefore, the importance of energy efficient
routing protocols has been increased. In order to minimize energy consumption, recently, a number of hierarchical routing
protocols are proposed. For instance, LEACH is an elementary hierarchical routing protocol that employs clustering technique
to achieve energy efficiency. A lot of research work has been performed to remove shortcomings and to improve the
performance of hierarchical routing protocols. Therefore, a comprehensive review is required which can review state-of-the-art
technologies, analyze functional and performance aspects, and highlight hierarchical routing protocol issues and challenges in
WSNs. This paper proposes a taxonomy for the classification of existing hierarchical routing protocols for WSNs and analyzes
the functionality and performance of existing hierarchical routing protocols. Moreover, it compares existing routing protocols to
highlight key technological differences and provides performance comparison for the selected LEACH based routing protocols.
Finally, the paper spotlights issues and challenges in existing routing protocols of WSNs, which can assist in future research for
the selection of appropriate research domain and provide guidance in selection of energy efficient techniques in the design of
energy efficient of routing protocols for WSNs.

1. Introduction major factor behind most of the research efforts in the field
of WSNs is because it helps to resolve most of the real life
Wireless sensor network (WSN) comprises of large number problems like security, human safety, health care, and
of tiny and moderately low-priced computational nodes that defense sector [1–8]. In WSNs, a number of research direc-
transmit the valuable collected information to the base sta- tions are available which includes corporeal design, routing
tion (BS) for applicable processing. Figure 1 shows a typical strategy, procedures for power management, security issues,
structure of WSN. From last decade, wireless sensor net- and sensing capability of sensor nodes [3]. Lifetime of the
works (WSNs) have mesmerized extensive attention from sensor nodes is the utmost issue for WSNs, because sensor
academic research as well as from academic research. The nodes have very limited power resources [4–6]. Routing
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 Journal of Sensors

Internet

Wireless sensor network

Base
station

User

Sensor
node Target

Figure 1: Structure of WSN.

protocol plays a major role in the lifetime of the sensor nodes. shown in Figure 2. These attributes are discussed and ana-
Routing in WSN is not similar to other wireless networks lyzed in Section 3. The base of almost all hierarchical energy
because of various unique properties of sensor node like efficient routing protocols is LEACH. The enhancements
energy constraints, processing accomplishments, transmis- made in LEACH are achieved by making changes in the tech-
sion of collected information from multiple nodes to a single nique of routing, and the target of almost all enhancements is
base station, improbability of global address and random to optimize energy utilization and maximization of overall
deployment of sensor nodes, etc. In order to accommodate lifetime of sensor network [15].
these types of properties, different types of routing protocols The primary attention of this research is to focus on
were developed. The ultimate goal of these routing protocols mechanism of existing routing protocols and find their short-
is to achieve energy efficiency and maximize the overall net- comings which may lead us to work on it to have efficient and
work lifetime. optimum routing protocol for the next generation networks.
Sensor node life is dependent on the life time of battery Among various identified issues in WSN routing, energy effi-
which provide power to sensor node, on which the life span ciency is more important due to its linkage with entire com-
of the whole network is dependent. An energy source (power putation process of the sensor nodes. It is the task of routing
entity) supplies energy to the memory unit, sensing unit, and protocol to establish connection between sensor nodes and
transceiver. The memory unit is used for the storage of appli- receive data at destination station forwarded from different
cation related data and also contains device identification wireless nodes. In order to establish connection between sen-
information, sensing unit contains sensors to capture data sor nodes and CH, sensor nodes share hello messages on con-
from their environment, and the transceiver is responsible tinuous basis to stay connected with the active nodes. The
for the transmission and reception of data. Quick energy dis- distance between communicating nodes also affects the
sipation in sensor nodes which make them lifeless is the energy efficiency.
major problem in the field of WSNs [9]. By experiments, it The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2
is observed that inefficient routing algorithm causes quick introduces different LEACH based hierarchical routing pro-
dissipation of battery. Hence, it is major requirement to tocols. Performance results and evaluation of hierarchical
design and use energy efficient routing algorithms in routing protocols are presented in Section 3. Routing issues
WSNs which will definitely increase overall life time of and challenges are discussed in Section 4. Finally, Section 5
WSNs [1, 10–12]. ends up with the conclusion.
There are three main types of routing protocols specifi-
cally proposed for WSNs: (1) flat, (2) location-based, and 2. Materials and Methods
(3) hierarchical. In flat routing, the multihop strategy is used,
and each sensor node performs the same tasks [13]. The sens- In this review paper, a detailed literature study of hierarchical
ing mission is performed by the collaboration of sensor nodes routing protocols for WSNs is performed, and different tech-
with each other. In location-based routing, position informa- nologies of routing protocols are analyzed. The weaknesses
tion of sensor nodes is used to spread the data to a specific and strengths of reviewed hierarchical routing protocols are
region, instead of transmission to whole network [14]. In highlighted. Then, performed comparative analysis on the
hierarchical routing, network area is divided into clusters, basis of multiple factors discussed in Results and Discussion.
and sensor nodes with higher energy are responsible for the
processing and transmission of information. Hierarchical 3. Significance of Study
type of routing protocols provides best results in terms of
energy efficiency [2]. On the basis of different attributes, The WSN network is the very broad and trendy domain of
atypical taxonomy of WSN hierarchical routing protocols is research for both industry and research community. It has
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Sensors 3

Attributes of WSN
hierarchical routing
protocols

Network
Path establishment Routing strategy Scalability level Operating point
characteristics

Proactive Single hop Absolute scalability Distributed Homogeneous

Reactive Multi hop Optimal scalability Centralized Non-homogeneous

Relative weak
Hybrid
scalability

Figure 2: Taxonomy of hierarchical routing protocols for WSN.

so many parameters to study and protocols to adopt for com- between member nodes and BS. Due to additional duties,
munication. In this study, we highlighted the protocols of CHs dissipate more energy as compared to normal nodes.
routing in the WSN network as the data routing is the most Figure 3 illustrates the basic communication hierarchy of
important aspect of any network. In this, we have conducted LEACH routing protocol.
a comprehensive survey about the routing protocols with Setup phase and steady-state phase are two basic phases
respect of performance, network life, reliability, and so on. of every round of LEACH routing protocol. In the setup
In this paper, we thoroughly explain these protocol’s features, phase, clusters are structured, and CHs have been selected.
performance levels, and issues with the routing. This paper is Data transmission and aggregation is done in steady state
aimed at continuing the research work in the routing proto- phase [16]. To achieve minimum overhead, setup phase is
cols by describing the each protocol for the industry profes- shorter as compared to steady state phase. After formation
sionals and research community. This paper may help to of clusters, every sensor node takes decision whether to serve
find the issues with the protocols and continue introduce of as a CH or not, for the existing round. The proposed ratio of
new works in WSN network. CHs in the network (resolute a priori) and the number of
times so for the node has been selected as a CH are the deci-
4. Review on Hierarchical Routing sion criteria for the sensor node to serve as a CH. For exam-
Protocols for WSNs ple, a random number from 0 to 1 is selected by a node “z.”
The sensor node will be designated as CH only if the thresh-
Cluster based hierarchical routing protocols divide network old TðzÞ is more than a predefined value. For the calculation
into multiple clusters by defining hierarchy of sensor nodes. of T ðzÞ [1, 10, 16] below formula (Equation (1)) is used.
Every cluster consists of one cluster head (CH) and multiple 8
sensor nodes. Each sensor node collects information and for- >
< P
, if z ∈ G,
wards it to its CH. CHs perform aggregation on the collected T ðz Þ = f ðz Þ = 1 − P ∗ ð r mod ð1/PÞÞ
information and forward aggregated data to the next hop or >
:
main station which is called as BS, on the basis of predefined 0, otherwise,
routing algorithm. ð1Þ
LEACH routing protocol provides base for the develop-
ment of most of the hierarchical routing protocols in WSNs. where zis the total sensor nodes in network area, P is the pre-
LEACH is self-organizing and adaptive clustering routing ferred percentage of CH, r is the current round, and G is the
algorithm [1]. In it, the whole network area is divided into set of node energy needed for communication.
multiple clusters. Every cluster consists of multiple no. of CHs use MAC protocol to broadcast status messages, i.e.,
sensor nodes, one sensor node will be designated as CH, carrier sense multiple access (CSMA). In the selection of
and all other sensor nodes existed in that cluster become CHs, Received Signal Strength Indication (RSSI) is computed
member nodes. Member nodes transfer data to CH, and by member nodes. CHs form Time Division Multiple Access
CH forward collected data to BS after performing aggrega- (TDMA) schedules for associated member nodes. Specific
tion process [1, 16, 17].CHs perform as an intermediate node time slots have been allotted to each member node, and every
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
4 Journal of Sensors

Base Station (BS)

Cluster Head (CH)
Sensor node

Figure 3: LEACH communication architecture.

member node sends data according to their allotted time slot. consumption but also reduce packet drops and also reduce
Rest of the time member nodes stays in sleeping state. This interference with other signals.
feature in LEACH leads to less dissipation and increase the
battery life of each single node. 10pJ 2
Amplification Energy ðCluster to BSÞ d ≥ d 0 ðEfsÞ = /m ,
Comparatively LEACH hierarchical routing protocol bit
consumes less energy and improvers overall lifetime of the ð2Þ
network then other nonhierarchical routing protocols. In
spite of significant improvement in energy efficiency, still 0:0013pJ/bit
there are areas which may be improved. For instance, firstly, Amplification Energy ðCluster to BSÞ d ≤ d 0 ðEmpÞ = ,
m2
LEAH routing protocol do not perform well for large-scale
ð3Þ
networks. The reason behind that is its single hop strategy.
Secondly, CH’s selection mechanism is not efficient; there Efs
are possibilities that a node with less residual energy may Amplification Energy ðIntra Cluster Comm:Þ d ≥ d 1 ðEfs1Þ = ,
10
be selected as CH and a node with more residual energy ð4Þ
may not be selected as CH. Thirdly, LEACH cannot ensure
proper distribution of CHs in the network field, and fourthly, Emp
extraoverhead can be reduced by replacement of dynamic Amplification Energy ðIntra Cluster Comm:Þ d ≤ d1 ðEmp1Þ = :
10
clustering with static clustering techniques. ð5Þ
MODLEACH [18] improves LEACH routing protocol’s
CH replacement mechanism. In it, a programmed threshold MODLEACHHT [18] and MODLEACHST [18] are two
level of energy is used. In every round, CH’s energy is com- variants MODLEACH [18]. MODLEAHHT uses hard
pared with threshold level, and until the energy level of CH threshold level for communication process. The hard thresh-
is greater than the minimum threshold level, the CH per- old level is the attribute outright value which is used to trigger
forms his duties and may not be replaced with new CH. By the sensor node to turn on its transmitter and connect with
adopting improved CH’s replacement mechanism, MOD- CH to start communication process. On the other hand,
LEACH significantly reduced energy consumption. soft threshold level is a little variation in the value of recog-
In addition to optimization of CHs selection technique, nized attribute which triggers sensor nodes to power on the
two different amplification levels for communication signals probe and start communication process [19]. Both MOD-
have been introduced. On the basis of distance between com- LEACHHT and MODLEACHST use reactive approach
munication devices and type of communicating devices, dif- and significantly improve energy consumption as compared
ferent amplification levels have been used as shown by below to MODLEACH.
formulas (Equations (2)– (5)). For intracluster communica- MODLEACH [18], MODLEACHST [18], and MOD-
tion, less amplification level is used as compared to cluster LEACHHT [18] adopt efficient CH replacement mechanism,
to BS communication. This strategy not only saves energy but routing protocol needs to be improved. Single hop
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Sensors 5

Base Station (BS)

Cluster node at level 1
Cluster head at level 2
Cluster head at level 3

Figure 4: TLHCLP communication architecture.

routing technique is used which do not work well for large- by compelling the crisp values from the input variables
scale networks. It is observed that in these routing protocols, and determining their membership values and fuzzy sets.
the CHs located at far end, dissipate more energy and become (2) Rule evaluation is done by smearing the fuzzified inputs
dead very soon. to the predecessor and resultant fragments of every fuzzy
Three Levels Hierarchical Clustering LEACH Protocol rule. (3) Aggregation is done at the output fuzzy to set
(TLHCLP) [20] assumes that the BS is situated at middle of the output variable. (4) Defuzzification is done for the cal-
the network field. The communication strategy is defined culation of the crisp value of the output. Block diagram of
on the basis of predefined radius around the BS. Figure 4 the FL-LEACH protocol is shown in Figure 5. FL-LEACH
shows basic communication architecture of TLHCLP. In it, [21] used fuzzy logic on the basis of two input variables,
cluster member nodes are at level 1, CHs located outside which are the density of the network and the total number
the range of predetermined radius are at level 2, and CHs of nodes in the WSN. Equation (6) shows the computation
located within the range of predetermined radius are at level of CHs (PFL ) percentage.
3. Nodes at level 1 collect information from the environment
and send data to CH. CHs at level 2 send collected informa- Ð
x ∗ μFL ∗ dx
tion to CHs at level 3, which is located within the range of PFL = Ð , ð6Þ
μFL ∗ dx
predefined radius. CHs at level 3 communicate directly with
BS and send the collected information to BS.
In TLHCLP [20], in contrast to LEACH, every CH has no where x is the universe discourse and μFL represents the
need to directly communicate with BS. By using the concept aggregated output for membership. Although FL-LEACH
of predetermined radius, the CHs those have less distance [21] protocols provide best distribution of CHs and
from BS only communicate with BS. As the distance between enhance the overall network lifetime, but it increases the
communicating nodes has been reduced, minimized amplifi- complexity level of the routing protocol. CH selection cri-
cation energy is needed, so the energy dissipation due to teria are also not efficient; threshold level can be used for
transmission has been minimized. The major limitation in the selection of CHs, which may increase the overall life-
TLHCLP [20] is that it does not ensure that all sensor nodes time of the network.
become member of clusters. In LEACH-GPS [22], all the nodes in the network have
Fuzzy-Logic LEACH (FL-LEACH) [21] routing protocol added feature of Global Positioning System (GPS). Before
employs fuzzy logic in the selection of CHs and finds the startup of the steady state phase and set-up phase, each sen-
exact number of sensor nodes to be selected as CHs. The sys- sor node shares its location information with BS. BS divides
tem of fuzzy logic is composed by a fuzzifier, a fuzzy infer- the network area into a number of groups (like A1, A2, A3,
ence system, a set of rules, and defuzzifier. Mamdani …, etc.) on the basis of location information received from
method is adopted by FL-LEACH for fuzzy inference, which sensor nodes. Sensor node location and probability “p” are
has following four processes. (1) Fuzzification is performed the two selection criteria for the creation of groups. This
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
6 Journal of Sensors

Crisp input Crisp output

Network size
Input fuzzification Fuzzy interface Defuzzification PFL
Network density

Fuzzy rules

Figure 5: Input and output fuzzy variable (block diagram).

CH, and CH forwards accumulated data to next helper node,

and so on. Last helper node forwards collected data to BS. In
ETx (d)
order to assign timeslots, Time Division Multiple Access
(TDMA) schedules are used by CHs. Every CH receives the
data sensed by the sensor node in their cluster. Figure 7
Transmit Tx shows basic communication architecture of A-LEACH.
Kbit packet
block amplifier As only helper node is involved in routing process with
other clusters and BS, during routing phase, all sensor nodes
d remain in sleeping mode except helper node which mini-
Eelct (k) Eamp (k)(d2)
mizes energy dissipation. A-LEACH [23] extends the overall
lifetime of the network by distributing the aggregation and
routing tasks between CHs and helper nodes. The CH selec-
tion technique is inefficient; it consumes much energy in every
ERx
round for the selection of CHs. In order to avoid unnecessary
CH rotation in every round and save more energy, threshold
level should be used for the selection of CHs.
Receive Advanced Zonal Rectangular LEACH (AZR-LEACH)
Kbit packet
block [24] uses static clustering technique and also improved CH
selection technique. It logically partition network into three
Eelct (k) sections, such as rectangular clusters, advanced clusters,
and zones. In it, BS is situated at the middle of the network
Figure 6: LEACH-GPS radio communication model. field. The network field is divided into fixed number of clus-
ters which are nominated as rectangular clusters. The cluster
situated around BS is nominated as advanced clusters, and
group formation activity does not consume much energy member nodes of these clusters are called advance nodes.
because it is done only once in the lifetime of the network. The CHs located in advance clusters forward data directly
Each group contains a CH, which is randomly selected in to BS. A group of rectangular clusters forms zone. Every zone
each round to avoid uneven distribution of CH’s in the net- contains minimum one advance cluster. The structural dia-
work. For data communication, multihop strategy is adopted. gram of AZR-LEACH is shown in Figure 8.
Each CH sends collected information to the nearest CH, and AZR-LEACH [24] introduces efficient CH selection and
then, the last CH finally forwards it to the BS. It reduces reselection strategy. In it, every rectangular cluster, a CH with
energy consumption by reducing the distance of radio com- highest energy is selected as CH. After selection of CH, every
munication. Figure 6 represents a typical radio communica- node in rectangular cluster forwards their energy status to
tion model. The major deficiency in this protocol is that the CH. When CH reaches to a threshold level, then the existing
CH selection technique is inefficient and consumes much CH nominates its member node as a CH. This CH selection
energy in every round for the selection of CHs. Energy con- process reduces a lot of energy consumption. As the area of
sumption can be reduced by adopting efficient CH selection the network field is equally distributed into clusters and zones,
technique, introduced by MODLEACH [18]. the traffic load is equally distributed in the network. The short-
Assisted LEACH (A-LEACH) [23] presents the idea of coming in AZR-LEACH [24] is that it is not scalable.
load sharing and multihoping. The duties of CH have been Intrabalanced LEACH (IBLEACH) [25] improves net-
distributed. In it, apart from selection of CH, another node work lifetime by balancing the workload in the network.
named as helper node is also designated. In it, every cluster IBLEACH has introduced presteady state phase before the
consists of member nodes, CH, and a member node. As steady state phase. Three phases are involved in each round:
shown in Figure 7, member nodes send collected data to setup, presteady, and steady state. Operation process of one
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Sensors 7

Sensed data

Base Station (BS)

Cluster Head (CH)
Helper node
Sensor node

Figure 7: A-LEACH communication architecture.

Zone A Zone B

Zone C Zone D

Base Station (BS) Advance node

Cluster Head (CH) Sensor node

Figure 8: Structural diagram AZR-LEACH [24].

round of IBLEACH is shown in Figure 9. The operation of slots allotted to them. The aggregator always keeps its
setup phase is the same as LEACH. In presteady phase, clus- receiver in listening state to receive data from the member
ter workload (data aggregation + communication to BS) is nodes. As the cluster load has been shared with member
calculated in the first frame, and then, a member of CH is nodes, the lifetime of the CH is increased; as a result, the
selected which is capable of handling the aggregation process. overall lifetime of the network has been improved. The major
If any member node did not have the capability of aggrega- shortcoming in IBLEACH [25] is that it has less scalability
tion then for that cluster aggregation is done by CH, other- level. Furthermore, CH selection technique is inefficient,
wise, every member node performs aggregation task on which consumes more energy in the selection of CH in every
sensed data and forward aggregated data to CH. The steady round. Overall lifetime of the network can be further
state task is distributed into frames. In each frame, member improved by using threshold level for the selection of CHs,
node sends sensed data to aggregator on the basis of time which is introduced by MODLEACH [18].
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
8 Journal of Sensors

Sensor node 1 Awake

Sensor node 2 Awake

Sensor node j

Setup Pre-steady Frame Frame Frame Setup

Steady state

Round Round

Figure 9: One round of IBLEACH operation.

Centralized Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy improved by using threshold level. Firstly, in the first round,
(LEACH-C) [2, 26] uses centralized clustering mechanism. as the energy level of all nodes is at the same level, so cell
In LESCH-C, routing protocol strategy for CHs has been heads and CHs are selected in a random fashion. At the com-
improved. The process of this routing protocol consists of pletion of first round, nodes may be at different energy level.
steady state phase and setup phase. The steady state phase When the energy of a cell head reaches to a threshold limit
has been improved, and no change is observed in setup phase then cell head sends an alert message to neighbor nodes those
as compared to LEACH. In it, every sensor node needs to be contain information about minimum average energy neces-
equipped with GPS module, because at start of every round, sary for the selection of cell head. At the reception of the alert
each sensor node sends his location information and energy message, every neighbor node compares its lingering energy
level to BS. On the basis of received energy level and geo- with the average minimum energy necessary for the selection
graphic location of sensor nodes, BS selects CH for every of cell heads and sends back the acknowledgement message
cluster which have higher remaining energy. After selection to cell head which contains comparison information. At the
of the group of CHs, it is broadcasted to the entire network. reception of acknowledgment packets from all neighboring
On reception of CH’s broadcast, the sensor nodes compare nodes, cell head decides the next cell head on the basis of
their own unique id with the received CHs; if that id match, maximum residual energy. For CH’s selection, the same
then the node considers himself as CH and if it did not get strategy is adopted as in cell head selection. Figure 10 shows
any matching id then that node tries to establish a link with communication architecture of Cell-LEACH.
its nearest CH. CHs use TDMA schedule [19, 27] to get data To reach BS, the shortest path is computed by CHs by
from member nodes. LEACH-C uses a deterministic thresh- maintaining a neighbor table, in which information of all
old algorithm to gather energy level of sensor nodes and also other CHs is available. With the change in CHs, the routing
to maintain record of nodes which has already been selected path to reach BS is also updated accordingly. At the end of
as CH. Due to centralized CH’s selection process, the overall setup phase, BS broadcasts interest packets to CHs which
load on CHs has been reduced, and energy dissipation has portrays interest area of the network. CHs forward interest
also been reduced. On the other hand, energy consumption packets to cell heads, and then, cell heads forward it to their
in process of sharing GPS and energy information with BS respective sensor nodes. Cell-LEACH [28] adopts a proactive
has been increased, which degraded the performance of this approach in the routing of data packets. This approach con-
routing protocol. LEACH-C [26] works well for small scale sumes much energy, as all the time it has to act proactively. In
networks and under perform for larger networks. order to achieve energy efficiency, the hybrid approach
Cell-LEACH [28] divides each cluster into seven equal should be adopted.
subsections; these subsections are named as cells. Likewise, In order to support mobility of sensor nodes within the
each cluster has a CH; each cell has a cell head. Sensor nodes network area, LEACH-Mobile [29] routing protocol is pro-
in a cell communicate with cell head, and then, cell head is posed. In it, CHs, as well as member nodes, can change their
responsible to communicate with CHs. Aggregation is per- location, and BS is assumed to stay static. Mobile sensor
formed by CHs on collected data from cell heads, and aggre- nodes ensure their membership declaration within a cluster.
gated data is forwarded to BS by using multihoping Like LEACH routing protocol, each round comprises of
communication method. CH selection criteria have also been two phases, steady state phase, and setup phase. It is assumed
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Sensors 9

Base Station (BS) Sensor node

Cluster Head (CH) Cell limits
Cell head Cluster limits

Figure 10: Cell LEACH communication architecture [28].

that sensor nodes always contain data for the communication As shown in Figure 11, the network area is divided into
and nodes are mobile centric in nature. Each CH forwards three logical stages (S1, S2, and S3), and a forwarder node
data request packet to its member nodes at its applicable time is installed in the middle of the wireless sensor network field.
slot and starts a timer for the response packet. If the timer The sensor nodes in stage S1 communicate with their CHs,
expires, then the CH again forwards request packet to the and then, CHs forward the received data directly to BS. The
member node and resets the timer. If again the timer will sensor nodes in stage S2 communicate directly with the for-
expire and no reply packet is received, then CH assumes that warder node, and then, forwarder node sends the received
this particular member node has been moved out from its data to the base station. The sensor nodes in stage S3 com-
cluster area, then removes it from the member table, and municate with their CHs; CHs forward the received data to
TDMA schedule is updated. Conversely, the member node the forwarder node, and then, forwarder node sends the
that has not received any request packets from CH in the accumulated received data to the BS. In EE-MRP, an efficient
allotted time slot assumes that the CH has been moved to CH selection algorithm is adopted, and unnecessary fre-
some other location, and now, it is not the member of its quency of reclustering is exterminated. Multiple amplifica-
cluster. The sensor node starts to broadcast join message tion levels on the basis of distance between communicating
packets to become a member of the new cluster. CHs those nodes are used for the transmission of data between trans-
received join message reply with advertisement packet to mitter and receiver, which ensures efficient transmission for
the mentioned node. The node then decides to join a cluster both intercluster transmission and intracluster transmission.
on the basis of signal strength. Furthermore, the node sends It is observed that energy efficiency and performance has
the joining packet to the CH to declare its membership. After been improved convincingly.
reception of join message, the CH updates its membership Large-scale monitoring sensors are distributed around a
table, and also, TDMA schedule is updated. LEACH- large region, forming the supervisory control and data acqui-
Mobile [29] increased the quality of the network by achieving sition (SCADA) system, which collects monitoring input
a higher level of data delivery, but the major tradeoff faced is throughout the working field to centrally monitor and track
the less power efficiency because packet loss ratio becomes a specific method. For large-scale Internet of Things applica-
very high if the CH continues in moving state earlier to the tions, though, dependable and energy-efficient data gathering
selection of the CHs for the next round. remains a problem. To extend lifespan with a trusted design,
Energy Efficient Multistage Routing Protocol for Wire- a trust-based energy intensive data gathering with unmanned
less Sensor Networks (EE-MRP) [30] adopted hybrid aerial vehicle (TEEDC-UAV) protocol is presented. First, the
approach where the network field is divided in multiple seg- TEEDC-UAV framework proposes an ant colony-based
ments on the basis of area of the network. The concept of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) trajectory optimization
gateway node is also introduced in the process of communi- technique that forms the maximum data connectors in the
cation. The lifetime (battery power) of gateway node is more work environment with the shortest trajectory feasible. The
than the power of other sensor nodes, by which it stays alive proposed TEEDC-UAV framework can effectively find an
throughout until all other sensor nodes are not dead [31]. optimal data gathering trajectory that makes the network’s
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
10 Journal of Sensors

S3 S1 S3

S3 S3

S2

S3 S3

Base station Cluster head

Forwarder Sensor node

Figure 11: EE-MRP architecture [32].

energy usage become even most efficient, as demonstrated by With the technological increase of artificial intelligence
ample experimental results. The network lifespan has (AI) technologies, social networks (SNs) will be using AI to
increased by 48.9% as opposed to the previous approaches. recover valuable user information and enhance people’s
In the meantime, the trust model presented in this study will lives. While AI has made significant progress, it still faces
significantly boost the node safety level recognition perfor- numerous data collection problems, including increased
mance that reached 91 percent when using only 8% of net- data retention and high power consumption. A matrix
work life [33]. completion based Sample Point Choice joint Intellectual
Ground vehicles and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAVs) Traject Analysis (SPS-
are increasingly being reviewed as monitoring instruments IUTO) framework for data processing is suggested to solve
which can gather data in the Internet of Things owing to these challenges. The suggested algorithm is used to opti-
the mobile nature (IoT). In data, gathering methods estab- mize the UAV’s motion route. The suggested technique can
lishing and improving trust and safety conditions are funda- make substantial improvements in terms of power and
mental and necessary specifications. Author proposed a new incomplete features, as demonstrated by the experimental
system called “Trusted Data Collections through Vehicles in outcomes [35].
the Smart Internet” (T-SIoTs scheme) that aims to create an In several cases, real-time monitoring systems with green
integrity environment for social collecting through combin- wireless sensor networks (WSNs) are important for preserv-
ing trust vehicles and unmanned aerial vehicles. To test and ing better energy efficiency. This article assesses a scenario
endorse the T-SIoTs scheme, extensive conceptual studies wherein the green WSNs are used to track the state of the
and analyses have been established. The T-SIoTs structure Internet of Things (IoT) that is among the more important
will increase the protection ratios of 46 percent to 55.60 per- forms of energy use in the field of information and commu-
cent as compared to earlier research. UAVs’ energy usage can nication technologies (ICT). More precisely, we concentrate
be decreased through almost 46.93 percent using the routing on optimizing the cluster architecture to reduce aggregation
algorithm [34]. converge cast latency and energy usage in green WSNs [36].
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Sensors 11

5. Results and Discussion: Comparative [42] have proposed a sensor network solution which
Analysis of Hierarchical Routing consists of two types of nodes, type 0 and type 1.
Protocols for WSN Nodes belong to type 0 group acts as pure sensor
nodes, and type 1 group nodes perform the duty of
The key differences among each of the routing protocol to CHs. In case of a single hop routing protocol, as the
show how each routing protocol is different from each other CHs are fixed, CHs those are far from BS consume
in terms of its enhancements are shown in Table 1. These more energy as compared to CHs located near to
protocols are analyzed on the basis of (1) Additional Features the BS; this results in CHs located far from BS
w.r.t. LEACH (AF), (2) Distributed/Centralized (D/C), (3) become dead earlier, and a portion of the network
Homogeneous/Heterogeneous (HOM/HET), (4) Threshold become isolated. The nonhomogeneous scheme per-
(TH) Level used, (5) Path Establishment (PE), (6) Scalability forms better in case of multihop routing protocols.
Level (SL), and (7) Hop Count (HC). The major benefit in nonhomogeneous networks is
that the hardware complexity is just limited to the
(1) Additional Features w.r.t. LEACH (AF) attribute CHs. As compared to homogeneous WSNs, the het-
highlights the additional feature used in the enhanced erogeneous system is less vigorous to the failure of
LEACH routing protocol as compared to the basic nodes [39]
LEACH routing protocol (4) The Threshold (TH) level attribute shows either
(2) The Distributed/Centralized (D/C) scope of the rout- threshold level is used or not for the selection and
ing protocol indicates the selection procedure of rotation of CHs. If TH level is not used, then in every
CHs. In case the algorithm works in distributed fash- round, routing protocol is responsible for the selec-
ion, then the role of BS is limited to reception of tion of CHs. In every round, a lot of energy is con-
transmitted data from CHs. In it, every node broad- sumed in the election of CHs. On the other hand,
casts hello packets to confirm its availability in the routing protocols which use TH level for the selection
network area. On the basis of proximity information of CHs, in every round CH, remain unchanged until
and remaining energy of nodes, the CHs and cluster energy level of CHs reached up to TH level. The rout-
area are autonomously determined in the sensor net- ing protocols which use TH level for the selection of
work area [37]. Distributed algorithm has four phases CHs consume less energy as compared to routing
which are executed in setup frame. In ðn − 1ÞSrnd + protocols which do not use TH level
q−1
∑ j=1 Sj,where Srnd = ∑4j=1 S j + Sss and period of the (5) The Path Establishment (PE) attribute of the routing
state is represented by Sss . In case the algorithm protocol represents the routing strategy adopted for
works in centralized fashion, CHs are selected by the communication of data from sensor nodes up to
BS. For that purpose, Vector Quantization (VQ) the final destination BS. There are three modes of
technique is used by BS [38]. By using centralized operation for path establishment which are proactive,
technique, an even distribution of CHs is achieved reactive, and hybrid, contingent on how source to
all over the network. The average data signal received destination route is established [43, 44]. In proactive
at BS is more than the distributed protocol. The routing protocol, route computation is done in
major drawback in centralized algorithm is that it advance before they are categorically desired and
consumes more energy at the time of startup make sure to maintain an updated topology table
on the continuous intervals. It is considered that all
(3) The Homogeneous/Heterogeneous (HOM/HET) network paths are known to every node, and a con-
attribute represents competencies nature of sensor nected graph is maintained proactively. The benefit
nodes. The homogeneous network has nodes with of the proactive approach is that communication
same indistinguishable properties [39]. The primary starts without any initial delay, but constant traffic
goal of homogeneous networks is that all nodes overhead increases energy consumption and reduces
expire at the same time and will stay alive throughout overall network lifetime. In the reactive protocol,
the network lifetime. LEACH [1, 2] adopts periodi- route formation is done on-demand. If any node tries
cally random selection of CHs to perform the load to send data to a destination node and if that route is
balancing and equal energy consumption of each not previously used in the network lifetime, then the
sensor node. In homogeneous networks, as any node routing protocol will have to establish that specific
can become CH, so it is indispensable for every node route before the communication can be started. This
to have the capability of transmission at stretched technique reduces traffic overhead and increases
distance and also have the capability of MAC coordi- overall network lifetime, but there is an initial delay
nation with routing knowledge. Since all nodes have at the start of the communication. Routing protocols
the capability to act as CHs, catastrophe of any node those use an amalgamation of both proactive and
may not affect the whole network seriously [40]. Het- reactive protocols is known as hybrid protocol [43]
erogeneous (nonhomogeneous) sensor network con-
sists of nodes which may have two or more types of (6) The Scalability Level (SL) attribute in the routing
functionalities [39, 41]. For instance, the authors in protocols of WSNs has critical value because of very
 12

Table 1: Comparative analysis of routing protocols for WSN.

WSN routing protocol AF D/C H/NH TH level used PE SL HC EE (%)

LEACH — Distributed Homogeneous No Hybrid Limited Single hop —
MODLEACH (i) Uses threshold level for CH selection Distributed Homogeneous Yes Hybrid Limited Single hop 28%
MODLEACHHT (i) Uses hard threshold Distributed Homogeneous Yes Hybrid Limited Single hop 83%
MODLEACHST (i) Uses soft threshold Distributed Homogeneous Yes Hybrid Limited Single hop 122%
TLHCLP (i) BS installed at the center of network area Distributed Homogeneous No Hybrid Good Multihop 17%
FL-LEACH (i) Apply fuzzy logic to find exact number of CHs Distributed Homogeneous No Hybrid Limited Single hop 51%
LEACH-GPS (i) Nodes equipped with GPS functionality Distributed Homogeneous No Hybrid Very good Multihop 137%
A-LEACH (i) Introduces load-sharing technique Distributed Homogeneous No Hybrid Good Multihop 20%
AZR-LEACH (i) It is assumed that dimensions of network and BS position are known Distributed Homogeneous No Hybrid No Multihop 40%
IBLEACH (i) It transfers aggregation load to sensor nodes Distributed Homogeneous No Hybrid Limited Single hop 60%
LEACH-C (i) Nodes equipped with GPS/tracking facility Centralized Homogeneous No Hybrid Good Single hop 13%
Cell-LEACH (i) Clusters further divided into cells with cell head and CH Distributed Homogeneous Yes Proactive Good Multihop
(i) Nodes/CHs mobility
LEACH-Mobile Distributed Homogeneous Yes Reactive Very good Single hop
(ii) Suitable for mobility-centric environments
(i) Hybrid communication mechanism adopted
EE-MRP Distributed Homogeneous Yes Hybrid Very good Single hop 155%
(ii) Forwarder node introduced
Journal of Sensors

9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Sensors 13

high numbers and moderately high density of the but cannot grow more than a certain level. In precise, it may
sensor nodes. A good scalable network has the com- not be possible for a parameter to cross some specific limit. If
petence to survive and perform well under growing that situation occurs, then scalability level is considered as
and augmented workload. Arbitrary network model relatively weak.
and random network model are the two network
models on which scalability can be analyzed [45]. In (8) The Hop Count (HC) attribute of a routing protocol
arbitrary network model, the location of sensor nodes in WSNs has its effect on energy depletion of each
in the network area is not restricted; within that area, sensor node and CH. The short-hop strategy is con-
each node has the capability of reception and sidered more energy efficient because sensor nodes
transmission of data at any time. Spatial-temporal consume less communication power for shorter dis-
transmission scheduling policy or amount of trans- tances. The reason behind that is signal attenuation
mission powers are also not restricted. In random value of which power function (Equation (7)) is pro-
network model, sensor nodes are evenly distributed portionally equivalent [47]. Equation (7) is used to
in the network area, follows random traffic pattern, define the minimum energy requirement to establish
and when more sensor nodes are added in the net- communication between source and destination over
work area than fixed power of transmission can be a distance of d meters, where P0 is the signal power
attuned to guarantee connectivity of the network [46] received at destination node and α represents value
of path loss exponent, normally value of α varies from
(7) Due to its significant usage in crucial environmental 2 to 5 [48]
monitoring and target detection in both civilian and
military regions, wireless sensor networks (WSNs)
are gaining interest of researchers. To optimize the  α
d
routing process, load-balancing, and maximize the P ðd Þ = P 0 × 0 : ð7Þ
lifetime of the network, the large-scale implementa- d
tion of energy-constrained WSNs and requirement
of multihop traffic aggregation need optimal coordi- As reception cost is also not negligible, there is the short-
nation of routing protocol. Therefore, the WSN net- est range of distance from source to destination for which
work included the many routing protocol that optimal solution for communication can be the direct trans-
provide the reliability to the data packet delivery mission. The reason behind that by using multihoping strat-
from end to end. In the reliability, the overall amount egy, it may not save enough energy because of the receiver
of information was obtained at the sink. It presents a energy cost. However, if the distance between source and des-
significant method for calculating the efficiency of the tination is large enough, then a two-hop strategy is beneficial,
algorithm. In our study, we also thoroughly explain and if the distance between transmitting and receiving
the reliability factor in the node deployment sub- devices is further increased, then the 3-hop communication
heading. For the efficient packet and data transmis- can provide optimal results and so forth. Consequently, in
sion, the reliability matters a lot because it enhances order to calculate energy efficiency of a routing protocol for
the life of the network. The LEACH protocol works a given topology, then energy efficiency is compared on both
very effectively to maintain the reliability of the net- single hop and multihop strategies on the basis of distance
work and transmit the data packet at the destination between source and destination BS [47].
end safely [32]
(9) The energy efficiency with respect to LEACH (EE)
In a particular environment, three major levels are attribute provides the clear picture that how much
involved to investigate the scalability with respect to previ- improvement in energy efficiency in the enhanced
ously known factors [45]. Firstly, absolute scalability is LEACH routing protocol as compared to the original
measured with respect to existing characteristics (like envi- LEACH routing protocol is achieved
ronment, independent parameter, and primary metrics).
For instance, if the value of an independent parameter MODLEACH [18], MODLEACHST, and MOD-
increased up to infinite level, then the efficiency of the net- LEACHHT use threshold level for the selection of CHs, and
work may not lead to evaporate. In order to evaluate whether in each round, CHs are not changed, as compared to LEACH
a routing protocol satisfies the conditions of absolute scal- [1]. CHs are selected in every round. These protocols use sin-
ability, all metrics should be precisely defined. Secondly, if gle hop communication and homogeneous devices and have
absolute scalability did not satisfy (in most of the cases, it limited scalability. IBLEACH [25] uses single hop communi-
may not be feasible to ration absolute scalability for a routing cation and introduces load sharing by distributing the tasks
protocol in given milieu), the optimal scalability may be of aggregation and communication. Among all discussed sin-
achieved. A protocol is considered optimally scalable with gle hop routing protocols, MODLEACHST produces the best
respect to the given parameters (environment, independent results, and the second best is IBLEACH, which uses load
parameter, and primary metrics), if none of other protocols sharing technology. It can be determined that by using both
may be more scalable with respect to the same parameters. improvement techniques of IBLEACH and MODLEACHST
Thirdly, relative weak scalability may be achieved. In some at the same time, a better routing protocol may be intro-
cases, it can be a possibility that a parameter can grow larger duced, and more energy efficiency can be achieved.
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
14 Journal of Sensors

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
LEACH

MODLEACH

MODELEACHHT

MODLEACHST

TLHCLP

FL-LEACH

LEACH-GPS

A-LEACH

AZR-LEACH

IBLEACH

LEACH-C

EE-MRP
Energy efficiency

Figure 12: Comparative analysis of wireless routing protocols w.r.t. energy efficiency.

FL-LEACH [21] optimized the CH selection mechanism working in WSN network as well as it is also illustrating the
by adopting the fuzzy-logic system. It enhanced energy opti- working directions in the protocols to make them more effi-
mization by finding the exact number of CHs required for the cient for energy in WSN.
whole network area. FL-LEACH [21] achieves an overall bet-
ter level of energy efficiency, but scalability level is limited, 6. Routing Issues and Challenges
and its complexity level is also high. The most successful
achievement of FL-LEACH is high level of scalability. As Due to the changing nature of sensor network, as compared
the exact location of each node is marked and CHs are to conventional network, it is necessary to consider different
selected uniformly and distributed realistically on the net- issues and challenges those affect WSN routing protocol
work field and by using multihop routing, the distance either directly or indirectly. These factors can be categorized
between CHs and BS is reduced. AZR-LEACH [24] divides as node deployment, scalability, network dynamics, routing
the network area into zones and used multihoping strategy protocols, energy efficiency, congestion, coverage, security
for communication and achieved an average level of energy and privacy, and QoS [49, 50].
efficiency. In EE-MRP [30], by using efficient cluster head
6.1. Node Deployment. In WSNs, mostly node deployment is
mechanism and by use of hybrid communication mecha-
application dependent. It can be done in two different ways,
nism, noticeable energy efficiency has been achieved.
either in manual fashion or in randomized fashion [51]. In
There is need of analysis of LEACH and other routing
case of manual deployment, as the placement of sensor nodes
protocols for their performance of the energy efficiency.
is known so data transmission is done by predetermined
Here, the energy efficiency means that the management and
paths, whereas in case of random deployment, the sensor
control of energy while sending data by nodes within the net-
nodes are randomly scattered in the network field by creating
work. The energy efficiency makes sure that nodes should use
an ad hoc routing infrastructure. In random deployment, if
less energy for the data communication and enhance the net-
the uniform distribution of sensor nodes is not achieved, then
work life. With respect of this analysis, Figure 12 compares
it is necessary to perform optimal clustering to achieve
LEACH and other variants of LEACH routing protocol in
energy efficient network routing operation. The fault toler-
terms of energy efficiency. It is observed that all extended var-
ance or reliability factor Ri ðtÞ of a sensor node with the
iants of LEACH are comparatively more energy efficient than
Poisson distribution to find the nonfailure probability within
LEACH routing protocol. EE-MRP, MODLEACHST, and
(0 : t) time interval is represented by Equation (8) [12, 51].
LEACH-GPS have been noticeably improved up to 155%,
122%, and 137%, respectively, as compared to LEACH rout-
ing protocol. TLHCLP, MODLECH, and A-LEACH have got Ri ðt Þ = exp ð−Δi iÞ, ð8Þ
a little bit improvement up to approximately 25%. MOD-
LEACHHT, IBLEACH, and FL-LEACH have been notice- where Δi represents failure rate of “i” sensor nodes and “t”
ably improved over 50%. The Y-axis is explaining the represents the time period.
performance score of each routing protocol from min to
max performance score. The LEACH protocol is the least 6.2. Scalability. A routing protocol is considered scalable if it
protocol for the energy efficiency in the WSN network, and works well effectively, if number of sensor nodes in the net-
EE-MRP protocol is more efficient protocol for energy effi- work field are increased, and also effectiveness of the network
ciency. The Y-axis of Figure 12 is helping the research com- increases when the hardware resources are increased [41, 52].
munity to adopt the best protocol for energy efficiency while In WSNs, scalability can be measured in a number of
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Sensors 15

dimensions. The quantity of sensor nodes installed in the 6.6. Congestion. As WSNs generally set up by wireless ad hoc
network field may be up to 100s or 1000s or much more. networks, in which routing protocols are running on
The routing protocol should be workable in the network field CHs/nodes and in maximum cases, these are working in
in which large numbers of sensor nodes are deployed. multihoping scenarios. Nodes in these networks have very
limited resources and are deployed in unattended environ-
6.3. Network Dynamics. In most of the network architectures, ments. In recent years, researchers have provided ample
it is assumed that sensor nodes are fixed, but in some of the amount of weight to the congestion issue, but there are still
application mobility of both BS and sensor nodes is necessary a lot of space to optimize that issue. Congestion in the net-
[53]. Transmission of routing messages to a moving node or work may lead to many problems which include unselective
from a moving node is more difficult and challenging as com- drop of data packets. It is possible that some packets with
pared to stationary source and destination nodes. In case of low importance may be delivered, and packets of higher
moving nodes, in addition to energy efficiency and band- importance may plunge. Network congestion also increases
width, it is also more challenging to maintain route stability. energy depletion because saturation of links increased with
In most of the applications, dynamic events require periodi- the increase in congestion.
cal reporting, and accordingly, significant traffic is generated
to be routed towards BS. 6.7. Coverage. In WSNs, the area of deployed sensor nodes in
which all nodes can communicate is considered as coverage,
6.4. Routing Protocols. Currently, a lot of routing protocols and it provides the surety to accurately receive and transmit
for WSNs have been developed and proposed by researchers, data. WSNs are deployed in denser mode because it is an
and most of these protocols are based on the assumptions energy constraint network with limited battery life and also
and simulations. On the basis of communication architecture have limited computational resources. This form of arrange-
and topology, these protocols are divided into different cate- ment of sensor nodes is essential for the reason that
gories such as hierarchical, data-centric, and location-based nodes/CHs cannot rely on few routes; on the other hand, if
QoS [54]. A lot of research in WSNs is dependent on network is not densely deployed, then there are chances of
assumptions and provide good results which are limited up disconnection of route from BS if any node becomes dead
to the simulations but did not provide the same results on or its battery power reaches to the end. In such situations,
the real devices. For instance, as the distance between com- there can be a part of network or some clusters may be iso-
municating nodes is directly proportional to the quality of lated from the other network and did not have any route to
signals and less distance consumes less energy and mini- the BS. The best case for the coverage is to achieve the goal
mized energy dissipation. This is very accurate mathemati- to discover a route with the highest observance, and so any
cally and theoretically, but in reality, the environmental recognizable activity can be captured by the nodes [56].
parameters like obstacles and weather conditions may The study reported that an algorithm for the connected p-
directly influence the signal strength, which may badly vitiate percent coverage problem in wireless sensor networks to
energy efficiency and overall network lifetime. enhance network life. Before the suggested solution, the
authors thoroughly examined the coverage issues in the
6.5. Energy Efficiency [55]. The minimization of the energy WSN. In this study, for cover p-percent coverage, the pro-
consumption is the primary goal of energy optimization, posed method employs a learning automaton to pick the best
and it is considered to be one of the difficult tasks in WSNs. dominator and dominate sensor nodes. The work reveals that
Normally, WSN is scattered and arranged in an unattended the pDCDS algorithm performed much better than the exist-
location. In most of its applications, WSN is deployed only ing algorithms [57, 58].
once, and it is impossible to replace nodes or even physically
monitor sensor nodes, specifically in chemical industrial 6.8. Quality of Service (QoS). Circumscribed latency in the
areas and in armed scuffle fields. In the last few years, a lot delivery of data is also a compromised situation for the appli-
of work has been done in the field of WSNs, and the major cations which are time-constrained. Nevertheless, in most of
focus of most of the research was to optimize the energy effi- the WSN applications, energy conservation, on which overall
ciency and prolong the overall lifetime of the network. The network lifetime is dependent, is given more weightage as
reasons behind inefficiency in energy consumption may compared to quality of service for the transmission of data
include inefficiency of routing protocol, topology changes at [30]. With the passage of time, the energy of sensor nodes
runtime, mobility, nodes deployment, and difference of dis- is exhausted, and the quality of data transmission is degraded
tance between nodes/CHs and BS. While dealing with the to achieve maximum lifetime. Energy efficient routing proto-
real-time applications, it is necessary for all nodes to remain cols should be improved to achieve maximum quality of ser-
alive in the network; if any node becomes dead due to energy vice with minimum energy consumption. A study has been
dissipation, then the entire segment of the network becomes conducted on the QoS; in this work, the author revealed that
isolated, which is not affordable in real-time scenarios. In the one of the most difficult difficulties in wireless sensor net-
last few years, the researchers pay maximum attention to the works (WSNs), particularly regarding surveillance systems,
improvement of the critical issue (routing protocol) and pro- is QoS routing. Because of the higher packets drop and
posed different energy efficient routing solutions, but still, energy usage, the multihop data transfer in WSNs necessarily
there is a lot of space for the improvement of routing requires secure links for end-to-end transmitting data. To
protocols. reduce the delay and enhance the energy usage with respect
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
16 Journal of Sensors

of QoS in the WSN network, the author proposed the model. international conference on system sciences, p. 10, Maui, HI,
They proposed the distributed learning automaton algo- USA, 2000.
rithms for it. The results show that the RRDLA algorithm [2] W. B. Heinzelman, A. P. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan,
strikes a strong balance between a variety of QoS constraints, “An application-specific protocol architecture for wireless
including end-to-end delay and energy usage [32]. microsensor networks,” IEEE transactions on Wireless Com-
munications, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 660–670, 2002.
7. Conclusion [3] K. Sarammal and R. A. Roseline, “A review: wireless sensor
networks and its application, platforms, standards and tools,”
WSNs have limited resources; however, energy resource is International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology
most important resource among all resources, because net- (IJCTT), vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 2905–2911, 2013.
work lifetime is dependent on the life of sensor nodes and [4] H. Kour, “Hierarchical routing protocols in wireless sensor
sensor nodes stay alive on the basis of energy. It is observed networks,” International Journal of Information Technology
and Knowledge Management, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 47–52, 2012.
by detailed literature review that the most of the power
energy has been utilized during communication process. [5] S. M. Zin, N. B. Anuar, M. L. M. Kiah, and A.-S. K. Pathan,
“Routing protocol design for secure WSN: review and open
An efficient routing protocol plays the most important role
research issues,” Journal of Network and Computer Applica-
in optimization of energy consumption in the communica- tions, vol. 41, pp. 517–530, 2014.
tion process. In this survey paper, a well-known hierarchical
[6] M. A. Mahmood, W. K. G. Seah, and I. Welch, “Reliability in
routing protocol LEACH has been described along its
wireless sensor networks: a survey and challenges ahead,”
extended versions as well. Apart from the considerable Computer Networks, vol. 79, pp. 166–187, 2015.
improvement in power consumption by LEACH as com-
[7] P. Kuila and P. K. Jana, “Energy efficient clustering and routing
pared to other nonhierarchical routing protocols, there are algorithms for wireless sensor networks: particle swarm opti-
a lot of opportunities to improve energy efficiency by mization approach,” Engineering Applications of Artificial
improving the routing protocol. It is observed that by Intelligence, vol. 33, pp. 127–140, 2014.
improving the technology of sensor nodes, energy efficiency [8] B. Prabhu, E. Gajendran, and N. Balakumar, “Contemporary
can also be improved. For instance, in LEACH-GPS, sensor challenges in environmental monitoring application of wire-
nodes are equipped with GPS feature, and energy efficiency less sensors,” International Journal of Universal Science and
has been improved up to 137% as compared to LEACH rout- Engineering, vol. 2, no. 2, 2016.
ing protocol. Most of the routing protocols have improved [9] P. G. Vinueza, M. S. Naranjo, H. Mostafaei, Z. Pooranian, and
routing efficiency by adding multihoping (decreasing com- E. Baccarelli, “P-SEP: a prolong stable election routing algo-
munication distance) and setting threshold levels for the rithm for energy-limited heterogeneous fog-supported wire-
selection of CHs. EE-MRP has significantly improved energy less sensor networks,” The Journal of Supercomputing,
efficiency up to 155% by adopting efficient techniques. Most vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 733–755, 2017.
of the discussed LEACH variants have noticeable improved [10] X. H. Wu and S. Wang, “Performance comparison of LEACH
energy efficiency and overall network lifetime, but still, there and LEACH-C protocols by NS2,” in Proceedings of 9th Inter-
is a lot of space for improvement in routing protocol in terms national Symposium on Distributed computing and Applica-
of energy efficiency and performance. In our study, we have tions to Business, Engineering and Science, pp. 254–258,
highlighted shortcomings in every routing protocol, which Hong Kong, China, 2010.
can guide to design an optimized and energy efficient routing [11] S. Gupta and K. C. Roy, “Comparison of different energy min-
protocol. imization techniques in wireless sensor network,” Interna-
tional Journal of Computer Application, vol. 75, no. 18, 2013.
[12] H. Yetgin, K. T. Cheung, M. El-Hajjar, and L. H. Hanzo, “A
Data Availability survey of network lifetime maximization techniques in wire-
less sensor networks,” IEEE Communications Surveys & tuto-
The data are available from the corresponding author upon
rials, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 828–854, 2017.
request.
[13] A. Sarkar and T. Senthil Murugan, “Cluster head selection for
energy efficient and delay-less routing in wireless sensor net-
Conflicts of Interest work,” Journal of Wireless Networks, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 303–
320, 2019.
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest. [14] L. Blazevic, J. Y. Le Boudec, and S. Giordano, “A location-
based routing method for mobile ad hoc networks,” IEEE
Acknowledgments Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 97–110,
2005.
This work was partially supported by the Natural Science [15] A. Kaur and A. Grover, “LEACH and extended LEACH
Foundation of China (NSFC) under grant no. 62072217. protocols in wireless sensor network-a survey,” International
Journal of Computer Applications, vol. 116, no. 10, pp. 1–5,
References 2015.
[16] M. Sharma and K. Sharma, “An Energy Efficient Extended
[1] W. R. Heinzelman, A. Chandran, and H. Balakrishnan, LEACH (EEE LEACH),” in International Conference on
“Energy- efficient communication protocol for wireless micro- communication Systems and Network Technologies, Rajkot,
sensor networks,” in Proceedings of the 33rd annual Hawaii Gujarat, India, 2012.
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Sensors 17

[17] R. M. BaniHni and A. A. Ijjeh, “A survey on LEACH-based [32] H. Mostafaei, “Energy-efficient algorithm for reliable routing
energy aware protocols for wireless sensor networks,” Journal of wireless sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
of Communications, vol. 8, no. 3, 2013. Electronics, vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 5567–5575, 2018.
[18] D. Mahmood, N. Javaid, S. Mahmood, S. Qureshi, A. M. [33] S. López-Torres, H. López-Torres, J. Rocha-Rocha et al., “IoT
Memon, and T. Zaman, “MODLEACH: a variant of LEACH monitoring of water consumption for irrigation systems using
for WSNs,” in Eighth International Conference on Broadband, SEMMA methodology,” in International conference on intelli-
Wireless Computing, Communication and Applications, Com- gent human computer interaction, pp. 222–234, Cham, 2019.
piegne, France, 2013. [34] M. K. Khan, M. Shiraz, K. Z. Ghafoor, S. Khan, A. S. Sadiq, and
[19] Q. Shaheen, M. Shiraz, S. Khan et al., “Towards energy saving G. Ahmed, “EE-MRP: energy-efficient multistage routing pro-
in computational clouds: taxonomy, review, and open chal- tocol for wireless sensor networks,” Journal of Wireless Com-
lenges,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 29407–29418, 2018. munications and Mobile Computing, vol. 2018, article
[20] H. Taneja and P. Bhalla, “An improved version of LEACH: 6839671, pp. 1–13, 2018.
three levels hierarchical clustering LEACH protocol [35] S. Al-Sodairi and R. Ouni, “Reliable and energy-efficient multi-
(TLHCLP) for homogeneous WSN,” International Journal of hop LEACH-based clustering protocol for wireless sensor net-
Advanced Research in Computer and Communication Engi- works,” Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems,
neering, vol. 2, no. 9, 2013. vol. 20, pp. 1–13, 2018.
[21] F. Al-Ma’aqbeh, O. Banimelhem, E. Taqieddin, F. Awad, and [36] M. Peng, W. Liu, T. Wang, and Z. Zeng, “Relay selection joint
M. Mowafi, “Fuzzy logic based energy efficient adaptive clus- consecutive packet routing scheme to improve performance
tering protocol,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Con- for wake-up radio-enabled WSNs,” Wireless Communications
ference on Information and Communication Systems, New and Mobile Computing, vol. 2020, 32 pages, 2020.
York, 2012no. 21. [37] A. Cenedese, M. Luvisotto, and G. Michieletto, “Distributed
[22] M. Dakshayini, P. Kurer, and H. S. Guruprasad, “Energy aware clustering strategies in industrial wireless sensor networks,”
dynamic clustering and hierarchical routing based on LEACH IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 13, no. 1,
for WSN,” International Journal of Computer Networking, pp. 228–237, 2017.
Wireless and Mobile communications (IJCNWMC), vol. 3, [38] J. Guo and H. Jafarkhani, “Sensor deployment with limited
no. 3, pp. 79–86, 2013. communication range in homogeneous and heterogeneous
[23] S. V. Kumar and A. Pal, “Assisted-leach (a-leach) energy effi- wireless sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless
cient routing protocol for wireless sensor networks,” Interna- Communications, vol. 15, no. 10, 2016.
tional Journal of Computer and Communication Engineering, [39] R. Thalore, P. P. Bhattacharya, and M. K. Jha, “Performance
vol. 2, no. 4, 2013. comparison of homogeneous and heterogeneous 3D wireless
[24] Z. A. Khan and S. Sampalli, “AZR-LEACH: an energy efficient sensor networks,” Journal of Telecommunications and Infor-
routing protocol for wireless sensor networks,” International mation Technology, vol. 2, pp. 32–37, 2017.
Journal of Communications, Network and System Sciences, [40] M. S. Azizi and M. L. Hasnaoui, “An energy efficient clustering
vol. 5, pp. 785–795, 2012. protocol for homogeneous and heterogeneous wireless sensor
[25] Q. Shaheen, M. Shiraz, M. U. Hashmi, D. Mahmood, and network,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference
R. Akhtar, “A lightweight location-aware fog framework on Networking, Informatin Systems & Security, Rabat,
(LAFF) for QoS in Internet of Things paradigm,” Mobile Infor- Morocco, 2019.
mation Systems, vol. 2020, 15 pages, 2020. [41] I. Snigdh and D. Gosain, “Analysis of scalability for routing
[26] S. Shi, X. Liu, and X. Gu, “An energy-efficiency optimized protocols in wireless sensor networks,” International Journal for
LEACH-C for wireless sensor networks,” in 7th International Light and Electron Optics, vol. 127, no. 5, pp. 2535–2538, 2016.
ICST Conference on Communications and Networking in [42] V. Mhatre and C. Rosenberg, “Design guidelines for wireless
China (CHINACOM), Kunming, China, 2012. sensor networks: communication, clustering and aggregation,”
[27] J. Gnanambigai, D. N. Rengarajan, and K. Anbukkarasi, Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 2, pp. 45–63, 2004.
“Leach and its desendant protocols: a survey,” International [43] T. Rault, A. Bouabdallah, and Y. Challal, “Energy efficiency in
Journal of Communication and Computer Technologies, wireless sensor networks: a top-down survey,” Computer Net-
vol. 1, no. 3, 2012. works, vol. 67, pp. 104–122, 2014.
[28] Y. Yektaparast, F. H. Nabavi, and A. Sarmast, “An improve- [44] N. Kaur and M. S. Kahlon, “A review on reactive and proactive
ment on LEACH protocol (Cell-LEACH),” in 14th Interna- wireless sensor networks protocols,” International Journal of
tional Conference, Advanced Communication Technology Computer Applications, vol. 95, no. 11, 2014.
(ICACT), PyeongChang, Korea (South), 2012. [45] V. K. Verma, S. Singh, and N. P. Pathak, “Analysis of scalabil-
[29] P. Maurya and A. Kaur, “A survey on descendants of LEACH ity for AODV routing protocol in wireless sensor networks,”
protocol,” International Journal of Information Engineering Optik – International Journal for Light and Electron Optics,
and Electronic Business, vol. 2, pp. 46–58, 2016. vol. 125, no. 2, pp. 748–750, 2014.
[30] R. Fang, J. Wang, W. Sun, and Q. Li, “QoS model of WSNs [46] C. Liang and F. Richard Yu, “Wireless network virtualization: a
communication in smart distribution grid,” International survey, some research issues and challenges,” IEEE Communi-
Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 12, Article ID cations Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 17, 2014.
6926793, 2016. [47] H. P. Luong, S. H. Nguyen, H. L. Vu, and B. Q. Vo, “One-hop
[31] X. Liu, H. Song, and A. Liu, “Intelligent UAVs trajectory opti- vs. multi-hop broadcast protocol for DSRC safety applica-
mization from space-time for data collection in social net- tions,” in IEEE 15th International Symposium on World of
works,” IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks, Sydney, NSW,
Engineering, vol. 2, 2020. Australia, 2014.
 9161, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2021/7459368 by Iraq Hinari NPL, Wiley Online Library on [04/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
18 Journal of Sensors

[48] A. Osseiran, F. Jose, and P. Marsch, 5G Mobile and Wireless Com-

munications Technology, Cambridge University Press, 2016.
[49] N. Zaman and A. B. Abdullah, Energy Efficient Routing in
Wireless Sensor Network: Research Issues and Challenges,
2010, http://eprints.utp.edu.my/.
[50] K. Seelam, K. K. C. Rao, K. Vyas, and T. Aishwarya, “A novel
contention resolution protocol for wireless sensor networks,”
in International Conference on Intelligent Computing and
Communication Technologies, pp. 449–456, Singapore, 2019.
[51] S. Kumar, M. Bhardwaj, and A. Q. Bhat, “Study of wireless sen-
sor networks its routing challenges and available sensor
nodes,” International Journal of Engineering Research & Tech-
nology (IJERT), vol. 2, no. 2, 2013.
[52] S. Muthukarpagam, V. Niveditta, and S. Neduncheliyan,
“Design issues, topology issues, quality of service support for
wireless sensor networks: survey and research challenges,”
International Journal of Computer applications, vol. 1, no. 6,
pp. 1–4, 2010.
[53] C. J. Watras, M. Morrow, K. Morrison et al., “Evaluation of
wireless sensor networks (WSNs) for remote wetland monitor-
ing: design and initial results,” Environmental monitoring and
assessment, vol. 186, no. 2, pp. 919–934, 2014.
[54] S. K. Singh, M. P. Singh, and D. K. Sing, “Routing protocols in
wireless sensor network – a survey,” International Journal of Com-
puter Science & Engineering Survey (IJCSES), vol. 1, no. 2, 2010.
[55] T. Li, W. Liu, T. Wang, Z. Ming, X. Li, and M. Ma, “Trust data
collections via vehicles joint with unmanned aerial vehicles in
the smart Internet of Things,” Transactions on Emerging Tele-
communications Technologies, vol. 23, article e3956, 2020.
[56] R. U. Anitha and P. Kamalakkannan, “Enhanced cluster based
routing protocol for mobile nodes in wireless sensor network,”
in International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Informat-
ics and Mobile Engineering, Salem, India, 2013.
[57] H. Mostafaei, M. U. Chowdhury, R. Islam, and H. Gholizadeh,
“Connected P-Percent coverage in wireless sensor networks
based on degree constraint dominating set approach,” in Pro-
ceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Model-
ing, Analysis and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile Systems,
pp. 157–160, Cancun, Mexico, 2015.
[58] B. Jiang, G. Huang, T. Wang, J. Gui, and X. Zhu, “Trust based
energy efficient data collection with unmanned aerial vehicle
in edge network,” Transactions on Emerging Telecommunica-
tions Technologies, vol. 17, article e3942, 2020.