MINOR-1 PROJECT

REPORT

ON

Performance analysis and evaluation of clustering and

routing protocol in WSN
Submitted By

Specialization SAP ID Name

AI-ML 500084392 MOHAMMAD MUJTABA AKHTAR

AL-ML 500083090 KETAN GARG

AI-ML 500083536 ROUNAK BAHUGUNA

AI-ML 500084117 LOHITAKSH SINGH

Under the guidance of

Dr. Prateek Gupta

Assistant Professor

School Of Computer Science

UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM & ENERGY STUDIES

Dr. Prateek Gupta Dr. Thipendra P SINGH

Project Guide Cluster Head

1|Page
 Table of Contents
Page No

1 Candidate Declaration 3

2 Abstract 4

3 Introduction 5

4 Purpose of project 6

5 Project Scope 6

6 Project Description 6

7 System Requirements 7

8 Methods 8

9 Literature review 9

10 Result and discussion 10

11 Pert chart 11

12 Conclusion 12

13 Acknowledgement 13

2|Page
 CANDIDATES’ DECLARATION

We hereby declare that the minor project work being presented

in this report entitled “WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORK”
(WSN) is submitted in the Department of Informatics (SOCS).
It is the authentic work carried out by us under the guidance of
Dr. Prateek Gupta (Assistant Professor). We would like to
express our special thanks to mentor who gave us the golden
opportunity to do this project to understand about research in
WSN, which also helped us to undertake a lot of research and
we came to learn many new things.

Abstract

Efficient clustering method can effectively scale down the energy

3|Page
 consumption of sensor nodes (SNs) in WSN. In this project, we will
analyse different clustering routing algorithm for analysing the best
protocol in term of energy consumption of SNs and electing
clustering node on the basis of sensor node that has better residual
energy as compared to other nodes. Cluster heads collect the data
from other node in their range and sends the aggregated data to the
base station (BS). Various energy efficient protocols have been
designed for either homogeneous or heterogeneous networks.
Primarily homogeneous networks comprise of SNs possessing same
energy resources at the beginning of network whereas in
heterogeneous networks, SNs are equipped with varying energy
resources. The SNs cannot dissipate same amount of energy due to
radio communication characteristic. It is a difficult task to build
energy-efficient protocols that can operate well on both homogeneous
and heterogeneous networks. In this project, we compare the
clustering protocols i.e., LEACH, DEEC, HEED, SEP in which we
will analyse, compare and try to find out the best algorithm based on
the network lifetime, stability region, energy consumption, number of
packets, number of alive normal node, number of alive advance node,
average number of cluster head per rounds.

Introduction

4|Page
 WSNs consist of number of small battery-operated devices known as
SNs.These SNs are followed with three basic principles: data sense
from external surroundings, computation on sensed data and data
transmission wirelessly. After the implementation of the network in
the field, the batteries can’t be changed. Therefore, the lifetime is
limited because of the limited energy of the battery. Instead of
wasting energy in direct communication to the BS, SNs send their
sensed data to their CHs that combine these data packets into a
meaningful information by applying some mathematical operations
such as aggregation, fusion etc. WSN applications can be classified
into two categories: monitoring and tracking. Monitoring applications
include indoor or outdoor environmental monitoring. Tracking
applications include tracking objects, animals, humans, and vehicles.
Wireless sensor networks have been widely applied in the field of
medical health, military surveillance, environmental sensing etc.
In the last decade, many clustering approaches have been
proposed for WSNs in which the energy conservation is the common
objective. The main part of each approach (protocol) is the CH’s
selection algorithm that defines the energy efficiency of the network
by using this well-known clustering protocols which work on the
stability region such as LEACH, SEP and DEEC and referred as
stability-based clustering algorithms.
In this project we compare LEACH, SEP, HEED and DEEC
protocols to analyze and compare these clustering and routing
protocols result in better network lifetime, stability region, energy
consumption, number of packets, number of alive normal node,
number of alive advance node, average number of cluster head per
rounds and try to find the better clustering protocol result on the basis
of above-mentioned parameters.

Purpose of Project
Purpose of the project to analyses LEACH, SEP, DEEC. HEED protocols and
5|Page
 compare these clustering routing protocols results in terms of better network
lifetime, stability region, energy consumption, number of packets, number of
alive normal nodes, number of alive advance nodes, average number of cluster
head per rounds and try to find the better protocols result on the basis of above-
mentioned parameters.

Project Scope
The battery life time of sensor node is minimum and once deployed into area of
unstructured framework batteries cannot change. A Hierarchal routing Protocol
in WSN helps to enhance the life time of the battery- operated sensor nodes and the
sensor nodes works longer. So, the communication between the environment and
sensor node would not be interrupt. This protocol can be used in many areas of
environment like Military Applications, Transportation Applications,
Medical/Health Applications, Agricultural Applications etc. Future researches
can be made on the mentioned protocols so that it can perform well in real time.

Project Description
The protocols we use which is capable of enhancing the life time of battery-
operated sensor devices i.e., LEACH, SEP, DEEC and HEED. In the initial stage
we used LEACH protocol to calculate the energy of sensor node after each round
then we used SEP, DEEC and HEED to analyze their performance on the basis of
lifetime, stability region, energy - consumption, number of packets, number of
alive normal nodes, number of alive advance nodes, average number of
cluster head per rounds.

System Requirements
User Interface: MATLAB, Internet connection

6|Page
 NON-FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS:

Software Quality Attributes:

Availability: Our project will be uploaded on platform cloud, GitHub which

will make the project accessible to all.

Portability: The project can work on any web browser on any system, which

makes the project portable.

Environment: User needs a MATLAB interface with any operating system.

Usability: The model is easy to use as it requires an initial Energy and different
parameters values as an input and it will predict the output in the form of graph.

. Software Interface

Following is the software for implementation:

Software used Description

Operating System We have chosen the Windows operating system for its
best support and user-friendliness.
MATLAB R2022b To implement the project, we have chosen MATLAB
programming language to implement the codes

Methods
We compare the clustering protocols i.e., LEACH, SEP DEEC and HEED in
7|Page
 which we will analyse, compare and try to find out the best algorithm based
on the network lifetime, stability region, energy consumption, number of
packets, number of alive normal node, number of alive advance node,
average number of cluster head per rounds.

we use concept of 2D array by which we can store our data in form of

matrices by which we can represent our graph on the basis of above
parameters.

The 2D array is organized as matrices which can be represented as the

collection of rows and columns in the form of [ ]m*n..

Literature Review
W. B. Heinzelman et al. [2] describe leach a clustering -based
routing protocol for Wireless Sensor Network. The sensor is
8|Page
 organized into cluster and randomly select a few nodes as
cluster head with certain probabilities of becoming a cluster
head per round where the information of node location and
energy level was communicated to BS. Cluster count (cluster
head) is not fixed in each round per epoch. So, cluster head
count varies in each round.
O. Younis et al .[1] improved the LEACH protocol by using
residual energy, node degree or density as a main parameter
for cluster formation to achieve power balancing. The
algorithms proposed in this protocol periodically selects
cluster heads based on the two basic parameters. The first
primary parameter is the residual energy of each node, second
parameter is the intra-cluster communication. HEED is not
able to fix the cluster count in each round and it is also not
aware of heterogeneity.
Georgios S. et al. [3] introduces the heterogeneity that
prolongs the time interval before the death of first node called
stability period. This protocol is based on the weighted
election probabilities of each node to become cluster head
according to the remaining energy in each node. There are
two types of nodes which are considered as normal nodes and
advanced nodes. Author extended the LEACH protocol
except the heterogeneity.
Li Qing et al [6] proposed a distributed multilevel clustering
algorithm for heterogeneous WSN. In DEEC, the cluster-
heads are elected by a probability based on the ratio between
residual energy of each node and the average energy of the
network. The epochs of being cluster-heads for nodes are
different according to their initial and residual energy. The
nodes with high initial and residual energy will have more
chances to be the cluster-heads than the nodes with low
energy

9|Page
 Result and discussion
performance
LEACH SEP DEEC HEED
criteria

Heterogeneity Two level and

Not present Two Multilevel
level Multilevel

Lower than
Cluster Stability SEP and Moderate High High
DEEC

Low as compare to
High as compare to
Energy Efficient SEP and Moderate High
DEEC
DEEC

Based on Initial Based on Initial,

Cluster head Selection Based on Residual
Rotating policy energy of advance Residual Energy, nodes
criterion Energy
node density

Prolong Network Prolong Network

Lower than Lifetime than SEP Lifetime than
Network Lifetime Moderate
SEP and DEEC and SEP,
LEACH LEACH and DEEC

Not best fit for

Stability region Low Moderate High stability it is best in
case network lifetime

10 | P a g e
11 | P a g e
12 | P a g e
13 | P a g e
14 | P a g e
15 | P a g e
 The result shows that HEED is a better protocol in

terms of network lifetime whereas LEACH, SEP

and DEEC is better in terms of stability. The table

shows the comparison of four protocols under

various performance metrics.

PERT CHART

16 | P a g e
 Conclusion
In this project we analyzed the hierarchical routing
protocols that are: LEACH, SEP, HEED, DEEC. Also
compare protocols in different parameters i.e., network
lifetime, stability region, energy consumption, number of
packets, number of alive normal node, number of alive
advance node, average number of cluster head per rounds.
DEEC does not require any global knowledge of energy at
every election round unlike SEP, LEACH and DEEC can
perform well in two level, three level and multi-level
heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. The main part of
each approach (protocol) is the CH’s selection algorithm
that defines the energy efficiency of the network by using
this well-known clustering protocols which work on the
stability region which are LEACH, SEP and DEEC.
Whereas Simulation results shows that HEED outperforms
the best in network lifetime among above four protocols.

17 | P a g e
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Prateek
Gupta, UPES, for giving me the support I needed to
reach the top and for giving me the chance to work
on the project. I owe a great deal to my group
members for their inspiring encouragement,
supportive direction, and gracious oversight in
helping me finish my project.
I want to express my gratitude and debt to the
activity coordinator Dr. Teekam Singh, whose
invaluable advice and patient guidance I received
throughout the course helped to shape the current
work as its display.
Presentation inspiration and motivation have
always played a key role in the success of any
venture.

THANK YOU

18 | P a g e