An Energy Efficient Routing Protocol

for In-Vehicle Wireless Sensor Networks

Chundong Wang, Zhentang Zhao(B) , Likun Zhu, and Honglei Yao

School of Computer Science and Engineering, Tianjin University of Technology,

Tianjin 300384, China
deviltangv@163.com

Abstract. In this paper, an advanced distributed energy-efficient clus-

tering (ADEEC) protocol was proposed with the aim of balancing energy
consumption across the nodes to achieve longer network lifetime for In-
Vehicle Wireless Sensor Networks (IVWSNs). The algorithm changes the
cluster head selection probability based on residual energy and location
distribution of nodes. Then node associate with the cluster head with
least communication cost and high residual energy. Simulation results
show that ADEEC achieves longer stability period, network lifetime,
and throughput than the other classical clustering algorithms.

Keywords: In-Vehicle Wireless Sensor Network · Routing protocol ·

Clustering · Energy efficiency

1 Introduction
Monitoring vehicular system and assuring safety of passengers have impelled the
deployment of sensors inside cars. Examples include impact sensors, speedome-
ters, knock sensors, and oxygen sensors. The sensors monitor critical system
parameters and send their data to an Electronic Control Unit (ECU), which
responds to abnormal conditions either automatically or manually. Since the
sensors are critical to safety of driver and passengers, intra-vehicular data collec-
tion should be reliable and efficient. As the number of sensor nodes in a modern
vehicle continues to grow rapidly, their wiring becomes a significant challenge
to vehicle designers and manufactures. It is estimated that a modern sedan has
in total more than 4 km of wires. Reducing wires by wireless technology means,
for instance, can potentially reduce weight, ease manufacturing and design cars
in a modular way.
The In-Vehicle Wireless Sensor Network (IVWSN) [1] consist of an vehic-
ular base-station (BS) [2,3] and a number of vehicular wireless sensor nodes
which is installable randomly to in-vehicle electronic components. They send
and receive the operation commands and the vehicular sensor information
through wireless communication to provide convenience/safety-related services
such as parking assistance system, Tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS)
and air-conditioner system. A base-station obtains and monitors the ECU status

c Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017
B. Zou et al. (Eds.): ICPCSEE 2017, Part II, CCIS 728, pp. 161–170, 2017.
DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-6388-6 14
162 C. Wang et al.

information transmitted from ECUs through the wired communication. Then,

a base-station transmits operation commands to vehicular wireless sensor nodes
according to ECU status information. A base-station receives and processes the
sensor information from vehicular wireless sensor nodes. Potential wireless nodes
in a IVWSN are required to operate under strict resource constraints. Specifi-
cally, power for transmitting data from sensor nodes to BS must be preserved so
that battery life is extended and recharging is infrequent as possible. IVWSNs
operate in a unique signal propagation environment including shadowing, mul-
tipath propagation and relatively short distance links. An efficient routing pro-
tocol is crucial for extending battery life peripherals. It follows that efficient
routing protocols should specifically be tailored to the IVWSN environment and
requirements.
To date, several communication technologies based on Zigbee, bluetooth,
and ultra-wide band technologies, have been examined for in-vehicle wireless
networking [4–6]. However, it is only recently that network layer aspects were
considered. In [7] the authors study experimentally the Collection Tree rout-
ing Protocol for intra-vehicle peripheral communications, showing performance
gains in terms of packet delivery rates as well as power consumption over the
traditional star topology networks. Power consumption is crucial for the IVWSN
application as removing the power wire to remote peripherals is very much desir-
able. The required long lifetime of the IVWSN poses stringent requirements on
the energy consumption of each of the peripherals, and the network as a whole.
Routing protocols, specially cluster-based techniques, play an important role
while achieving energy efficiency. According to this technique, members of the
same cluster select a cluster head (CH) [8,9] and nodes belonging to that cluster
send sensed data to the CH which forwards the aggregated data to the BS.
Clustering can be implemented either in homogeneous or heterogeneous WSNs
[10]. In homogeneous networks, nodes are equipped with the same energy level,
and in heterogeneous networks, these levels differ.
The proposed protocol in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) uses the opti-
mal CH by the residual energy of nodes for balancing energy consumption and
increasing network lifetime. Distributed energy-efficient clustering (DEEC) pro-
tocol is proposed in [11]. Authors in [12] proposed enhanced developed distrib-
uted energy-efficient clustering (EDDEEC) algorithm. This protocol changes the
cluster head selection probability in an efficient and dynamic manner based on
the absolute residual energy level. Authors in [13] proposed distance aware wait-
ing based EDDEEC (DWEDDEEC) protocol. This protocol sets the threshold
distance and have shown significant improvement over the existing EDDEEC.
In this paper, we proposed advanced distributed energy-efficient clustering
(ADEEC), where the clustering is performed based on the residual energy and
location distribution of node. The algorithm selects CH to make sure that nodes
with relatively low remaining energy are avoided as relays for other nodes. We
have also explored the feasibility and benefits of the WSNs modified DWED-
DEEC routing protocol in a IVWSN environment. Experiments proved that the
ADEEC protocol prolongs the network lifetime by heterogeneity-aware cluster-
ing algorithm.
 An Efficient Routing Protocol for In-Vehicle Wireless Sensor Networks 163

2 Assumptions and Model

The proposed work consists of the following assumptions:
(1) Topology is static and each senor node has unique ID.
(2) All nodes are aware of their residual energy and location.
(3) The base station with a fixed position and sufficient energy has the enough
communication capacity in the whole network.

2.1 Energy Level Model

ADEEC considers three-level heterogeneous networks that contains three dif-
ferent energy levels of nodes: normal, advanced, and super. The energy level of
normal node is E0 , the energy level of every advanced node of fraction m with a
times more energy than normal nodes is E0 (1+a). Whereas, super nodes of frac-
tion m0 with b times greater power compared to the normal nodes is E0 (1 + b).
As N is the total number of nodes in the network, then N mm0 , N m(1 − m0 ),
and N (1 − m) are the numbers of super, advanced, and normal nodes in the
networks respectively. Here the sum of energy of whole network is specified by:

Esuper = N mm0 E0 (1 + b) (1)

Eadvanced = N m(1 − m0 )E0 (1 + a) (2)
Enormal = N (1 − m)E0 (3)

The total initial energy of three-level heterogeneous WSNs is therefore calcu-

lated as:

Etotal = N E0 (1 + m(a + m0 b)) (4)

Thus, the three level heterogeneous networks have m(a + m0 b) times greater
energy as contrast to the heterogeneous WSNs.

2.2 Energy Consumption Model

The energy consumed by network should be as minimum as possible, therefore
the radio dissipation model should be designed appropriately. We adopt the
radio model used in [12], as the energy consumption of a node depends on its
components (modules) for special purposes like sensing, processing, and wireless
communication. Based on this assumption, the total energy consumption of a
node ET is given as follows:

E T = ES + E P + E W (5)

where ES is the energy consumed by the sensing module, EP is the energy

consumption cost of a processing module, and EW is the energy consumption
cost of a wireless communication module.
164 C. Wang et al.

3 ADEEC Protocol
In this section, we present the details of the proposed ADEEC protocol.

3.1 Energy Efficient CH Election

In the existing EDDEEC, higher energy nodes are elected as CH to attain energy
efficiency. To distribute the load uniformly among the nodes, node position dis-
tribution is considered. To reduce the energy consumption clustering process,
each node is assigned with specific weight based on its residual energy and posi-
tion distribution to become CH. The average energy of rth round from [11] is
given as:
1 r
Ē(r) = Etotal (1 − ) (6)
N R
where R denotes the total rounds during the network lifetime and is calcu-
lated as:
Etotal
R= (7)
Eround
where Eround is the energy dissipated in a network during a single round and is
calculated as:

Eround = l(2N Eelec + N EDA + kεmp d4toBS + N εf s d2toCH ) (8)

where Eelec is the energy dissipated per bit to ran transmitter or receiver circuit,
and εf s and εmp are the radio amplifier types for free space and multipath
respectively, EDA is the data aggregation cost expended by CH, dtoBS is the
average distance between the CH and the BS, and dtoCH is the average distance
between cluster members and the CH.
M M
dtoCH =  , dtoBS = 0.765 (9)
2πkopt 2

By taking the derivative of Eround with respect to k and equating to zero,

we can find the optimal number of clusters kopt and is calculated as:
√ 
N εf s M
kopt = √ (10)
2π εmp d2toBS

At the start of each round, nodes decide on the basis of threshold whether
to become CHs or not. The value of threshold is calculated as:
 pi
1 if si ∈ G
T (si ) = 1−pi ( mod (r, pi )) (11)
0 otherwise
 An Efficient Routing Protocol for In-Vehicle Wireless Sensor Networks 165

where G is the set of nodes eligible to become CHs for round r and p is the
desired probability of the CH. The probabilities for three types of nodes for the
CH selection by EDDEEC are given as:
⎧ popt Ei (r)
⎪
⎪ for normal nodes, if Ei (r) > Tabsolute
⎪
⎪
(1+m(a+m0 b))Ē(r)
⎨ popt (1+a)Ei (r) for advanced nodes, if Ei (r) > Tabsolute
pi = (1+m(a+m 0 b))Ē(r)
(12)
⎪
⎪
popt (1+b)Ei (r)
for super nodes, if Ei (r) > Tabsolute
⎪
⎪ (1+m(a+m0 b))Ē(r)
⎩ popt (1+b)Ei (r)
c (1+m(a+m 0 b))Ē(r)
for all nodes, if Ei (r)  Tabsolute

Where the best value of c from [12] as a variable controlling the clusters in
number equals 0.025 for enhanced network efficiency, Tabsolute is the value of
absolute residual energy level; Tabsolute = 0.7E0 , popt denotes the optimal rate
of clusters and is calculated as:
kopt
popt = (13)
N
Equation (12) primarily illustrations that the super and advanced nodes have
more energy than the normal ones. So, the super and advanced nodes are largely
preferred to be selected as CHs for the initial transmission rounds, and when
their energy decreases to the same level as that of the normal ones, these nodes
will have the same CH election probability like the normal nodes. However, the
existing protocols either discuss residual energy of node or impact of the distance
between the nodes. To balance the energy consumption in network, we focus on
the consideration of both factors. If there are two nodes with equal distance from
the BS, CH is selected based on higher residual energy. If there are two nodes
with same residual energy of rth round, the node closer to the base station
may results in selection as CH. Thus, we propose changes in the probability
function defined by ADEEC. These changes are that nodes decide on both the
residual energy as energy factor and the relative location as path factor whether
to become CHs or not. The probabilities for the CH selection are given as:
⎧ 
⎪
⎪
popt i (r)
(w1 EĒ(r) + w2 dtoBS for normal nodes, Ei (r) > Tabsolute
⎪
⎪ (1+m(a+m 0 b))
 di
⎪
⎪
⎨ p opt (1+a) E i (r)
(w1 Ē(r) + w2 d toBS
) for advanced nodes, Ei (r) > Tabsolute
(1+m(a+m0 b))
pi =  di
⎪
⎪
p opt (1+b) E (r)
(w i + w2 d toBS
) for advanced nodes, Ei (r) > Tabsolute
⎪
⎪ (1+m(a+m0 b)) 1 Ē(r)  di
⎪
⎪
⎩c p opt (1+b) E (r)
(w1 i + w2 d toBS
) for all nodes, Ei (r)  Tabsolute
(1+m(a+m0 b)) Ē(r) di

(14)
where di is the distance between the node from BS, dtoBS is the average distance
between the CH and BS, and w1 , w2 is the function of nodes weight for energy
factor and path factor respectively. Here w1 and w2 can be calculated as:
Ei (r)
(− i )
w1 = α × e E0
, w1 + w2 = 1 (15)
where α as a variable adjust the weight of energy factor and path factor. Equation
(14) illustrates that the path factor is more weight for original node at the start
166 C. Wang et al.

of operation. And soon after few round, with the decrease of residual energy,
the node with more residual energy have more probability for CH selection. The
detailed procedure of the proposed and selected algorithm is designed as follows:

Algorithm 1. Energy efficient CH selection

Input: The initial energy and location of every node
Output: The node is CH or cluster member for the current round
1 Initialize various parameters, such as radio parameters;
2 Calculate CH percentage popt and average energy of the network at present
round Ē(r);
3 for each node i do
4 if Ei (r) > 0.7E0 then
5 calculate pi using specific probability function according to its type;
6 else
7 modify the probability of node based on Tabsolute ;
8 if node has not been a cluster head in previous rounds then
9 node belongs to set G, where G is set of nodes eligible to become a CH
and node chose a random number between 0 and 1;
10 if random number chosen is less than threshold fraction then
11 node is CH for the current round;

12 else
13 node is cluster member and send data to their appropriate cluster head;

14 final;
15 return current node is CH or cluster member;

3.2 Node Association

When the node proclaims as CH, it advertises its node ID, residual energy and
location information along with the proclamation. Based on this information, a
non-CH node estimates CHs compatibility towards it. And a non-CH node need
to determine whether to send data through cluster heads according to their own
position and the residual energy.
The node selects CH with highest residual energy and lowest communication
cost. The CHs aptness is the ratio between the residual energy of the CH and
communication cost through this CH to BS. If a node receives multiple CH
proclamations, the node estimates the weight of each CH as:

Ei (r)
Wch (ni ) = (16)
ET x (l, d)

where ET x (l, d) is the communication cost of the node through CH to BS. The
node then associates with the highest weight CH in its vicinity.
 An Efficient Routing Protocol for In-Vehicle Wireless Sensor Networks 167

4 Results and Discussion

In this section, we evaluate the performance of ADEEC protocol using MAT-
LAB. IVWSN consists of N = 100 nodes which are randomly distributed in
area of dimension 10 × 2.5 × 3.5 m3 with a centrally located BS. The proposed
ADEEC protocol is compared with other energy efficient clustering protocols like
IV EDDEEC, and IV DWEDDEEC. The performance metrics used to measure
these protocols are: stability period, network lifetime, and number of packets
sent to the BS.

Table 1. Simulation parameters

Parameter Value
E0 0.5 J
Eelec 5 nJ/bit
εf s 1 pJ/bit/m2
εmp 0.013 pJ/bit/m4
EDA 5 nJ/bit/message
l 4000 bits

(1) Stability period: we mean the number of rounds from network initialization
till the death of first node.
(2) Network lifetime: we mean the number of rounds from network initialization
till the death of all nodes.
(3) Number of packets sent to the BS: we mean the total number of packets
that are directly sent to BS either from CHs or non-CH nodes.

The radio parameters used in our simulations are shown in Table 1. Results
along with discussions are provided in the following subsections.
Case 1: m = 0.8, m0 = 0.6, a = 1.5, b = 3.0.
In this case, we set 20 normal nodes having E0 energy, 32 advanced nodes
having 1.5 times more energy than normal nodes, and 48 super nodes contain-
ing 3 times more energy than the normal nodes. Figure 1 depicts the number
of dead nodes during the network lifetime. The first node for IV EDDEEC,
IV DWEDDEEC and ADEEC dies at 1851, 1429, and 2156 rounds, respectively,
and all nodes die at 7890, 7896, 7042 and 8343 round respectively. Figure 2 shows
that the data sent to the BS is more for ADEEC as compared to the rest of the
baseline protocols. ADEEC dynamically selects fittest CHs and adjusts the node
association part. Thus, ADEEC consumes relatively less energy which leads not
to only prolonged stability period but also prolonged network lifetime in com-
parison to the other protocols. Prolonged stability period and network lifetime
means that the number of packets sent to BS are more in comparison to the
other selected protocols.
168 C. Wang et al.

100
IV_EDDEEC
IV_DWEEDDEEC
80 ADEEC
y(nodes dead)

60

40

20

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
x(rounds)

Fig. 1. Network lifetime (case 1)

5
x 10
3
IV_EDDEEC
IV_DWEEDDEEC
ADEEC

2
y(packets sent)

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
x(rounds)

Fig. 2. Number of packets sent to BS (case 1)

Case 2: m = 0.3, m0 = 0.2, a = 1.0, b = 2.0.

In this case, we set 70 normal nodes having E0 energy, 24 advanced nodes hav-
ing 1 times more energy than normal nodes, and 6 super nodes containing 2 times
more energy than the normal nodes. Figure 3 depicts the number of dead nodes
during the network lifetime. The first node for IV EDDEEC, IV DWEDDEEC
and ADEEC dies at 1565, 1431 and 1889 rounds, respectively, and all nodes die
at 5868, 5994 and 6051 round respectively. Figure 4 shows that the data sent
to the BS is more for ADEEC as compared to the rest of the protocols. It is
obvious from the results that ADEEC is the most efficient among all protocols
in terms of stability period, network lifetime, and number of packets sent to the
BS, even in case of network containing less number of super and advanced nodes
as compared to normal ones.
In this case 2, to illustrate the impact of different numbers of heterogeneous
energy nodes on network performance, the number of normal nodes increased as
compared to case 1. Similarly, the number of advanced and super nodes decreased
 An Efficient Routing Protocol for In-Vehicle Wireless Sensor Networks 169

100
IV_EDDEEC
IV_DWEEDDEEC
80 ADEEC
y(nodes dead)

60

40

20

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
x(rounds)

Fig. 3. Network lifetime (case 2)

5
x 10
3
IV_EDDEEC
IV_DWEEDDEEC
ADEEC

2
y(packets sent)

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
x(rounds)

Fig. 4. Number of packets sent to BS (case 2)

as case 2 in comparison to case 1. The number of normal, advanced and super

nodes can be adjusted according to actual application based on related parame-
ters. Normal nodes have the least energy in comparison to advanced and super
nodes. Thus, as a whole, the total energy of network is downscaled in this case
as compared to the previous case. All the protocols are the same in this case as
compared to case 1 but with less initial energy resources. Therefore, the stability
period, network lifetime, and number of packets sent to BS are relatively on the
lower side in this case as compared to the previous case.

5 Conclusions

In this paper, we proposed ADEEC clustering algorithm based on the impact of

energy heterogeneity and the location of sensor nodes for the performance of the
whole network. Our contribution involves a deterministic CH election that holds
the energy cost factor and path factor. Secondly, the modified DEEC algorithm
170 C. Wang et al.

protocol originally designed for WSNs was shown to scale well to the IVWSN
environment. The newly proposed protocol is implemented in MATLAB. The
simulation results show that proposed the ADEEC protocol performs better for
the selected performance metrics in IVWSNs. In near future we will research a
extension that is to consider regenerated energy sources, i.e. energy harvesting
nodes. In this approach each node has a different recharging rate on top of its
current battery state. Estimating the recharging rate and including it into the
routing scheme can potentially enhance network performance considerably.

References
1. Yun, D.S., Lee, S.J., Kim, D.A.: A study on the architecture of the in-vehicle
wireless sensor network system. In: International Conference on Connected Vehicles
and Expo, vol. 4, pp. 153–162. IEEE (2013)
2. Ahmad, A., Javaid, N., Khan, Z.A., Qasim, U., Alghamdi, T.A.: Routing scheme
to maximize lifetime and throughput of wireless sensor networks. IEEE Sens. J.
14(10), 3516–3532 (2014)
3. Heinzelman, W.B., Chandrakasan, A.P., Balakrishnan, H.: An application specific
protocol architecture for wireless microsensor networks. IEEE Trans. Wirel. Com-
mun. 1, 660–670 (2002)
4. Reddy, A.D.G., Ramkumar, B.: Simulation studies on ZigBee network for in-vehicle
wireless communications. In: International Conference on Computer Communica-
tion and Informatics, pp. 1–6. IEEE (2014)
5. Hillman, A.P.: On the potential of bluetooth low energy technology for vehicular
applications. IEEE Commun. Mag. 53(1), 267–275 (2015)
6. Bas, C.U., Ergen, S.C.: Ultra-wideband channel model for intra-vehicular wireless
sensor networks beneath the chassis: from statistical model to simulations. IEEE
Trans. Veh. Technol. 62(1), 14–25 (2013)
7. Si, W.: Integrating wireless technologies into intra-vehicular communication. Dis-
sertations and Theses - Gradworks (2016)
8. Anisi, M.H., Abdullah, A.H., Coulibaly, Y., Razak, S.A.: EDR: efficient data rout-
ing in wireless sensor networks. Int. J. Ad Hoc Ubiquit. Comput. 12(1), 46–55
(2013)
9. Liao, Y., Qi, H., Li, W.: Load-balanced clustering algorithm with distributed self-
organization for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Sens. J. 12(1), 1498–1506 (2013)
10. Karalar, T.C., Yamashita, S., Sheets, M., Rabaey, J.: A low power localization
architecture and system for wireless sensor networks. In: IEEE Workshop on Signal
Processing Systems, pp. 89–94. IEEE (2004)
11. Qing, L., Zhu, Q., Wang, M.: Design of a distributed energy-efficient clustering
algorithm for heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. J. Softw. 29(12), 2230–2237
(2006)
12. Javaid, N., Rasheed, M.B., Imran, M., et al.: An energy-efficient distributed clus-
tering algorithm for heterogeneous WSNs. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw.
2015(1), 1–11 (2015)
13. Kumar, R., Kaur, R., Bhardwaj, R.: DWEDDEEC: distance aware waiting based
EDDEEC protocol for hetrogeneous WSNS (2015)