- - -

20436394, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/wss2.12007 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [07/02/2023]. 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
Received: 28 August 2020 Revised: 5 October 2020 Accepted: 19 October 2020 IET Wireless Sensor Systems
DOI: 10.1049/wss2.12007

O R I G I N A L R E S E A R C H PA P E R

A new energy aware cluster head selection for LEACH in wireless

sensor networks

Sina Einavi Pour | Reza Javidan

Computer Engineering and IT Department, Shiraz Abstract

University of Technology, Shiraz, Iran
Correspondence
Reza Javidan, Computer Engineering and IT
Department, Shiraz University of Technology,
Shiraz, Iran.
Email: javidan@sutech.ac.ir
Internet of Things (IoTs) as a new network pattern for the intelligent world usually uses
wireless sensor networks (WSNs) as a perception layer which consisted of numerous
number of sensor nodes scattered in the environment to gather intended information. The
selected information then is sent to a base station (BS) to be sent to cloud server for further
processing. Since the energy of sensor nodes is limited, the most significant challenge in
these networks is reducing the energy consumption of the network. It is proved that
dividing the network to clusters can significantly reduce the energy consumption. One of
the most popular clustering protocols in WSNs is the Low‐Energy Adaptive Clustering
Hierarchy (LEACH). In this protocol, cluster heads (CHs) are selected randomly which
results in poor performance in real scenarios. In this article, a new energy aware CH se-
lection algorithm is proposed which selects CHs based on the residual energy, the position
and centrality of nodes. It uses a variable range upon which the centrality and the number
of neighbours of each node are calculated. Simulation results show that the proposed
algorithm outperforms LEACH, Multi‐hope Routing with LEACH (MR‐LEACH) and
Enhanced Multi‐hop LEACH (EM‐LEACH) in terms of reducing energy consumption,
increasing network lifetime and improving network reliability.

1 | INTRODUCTION ‘Internet’ and ‘Things’. The ‘Internet’ can be best defined as

A wireless sensor network (WSN) comprises of a large number
of small sensors which run on battery and their energy re-
sources are limited [1]. Sensor nodes of WSNs are usually
deployed randomly in the environment. These distributed
nodes are used for monitoring environmental conditions (e.g.
temperature, pressure), such as the security analysing weather
condition and military applications [2]. Collected data is sent
either directly to the base station (BS) or to a local cluster head
(CH). The CH aggregates receive data and sends it to the BS.
Since these nodes run on battery, their energy is limited and the
battery cannot be replaced easily in many cases. When the
battery of the nodes runs, it can lead to communication failure
and data cannot be transmitted on time. Therefore, the lifetime
of the nodes needs to be increased and the energy consump-
tion should be decreased [1,2].
Internet of Things (IoT) is a world in which physical
objects are addressable and can communicate with each
other. It is conspicuous that IoT consists of two terms:
the interconnection of smart devices based on TCP/IP
protocols and ‘Things’ can be considered as any addressable
object. Therefore, IoT semantically can be considered as a
worldwide network of interconnected objects with unique
addresses [3]. IoT is growing as a framework in a dynamic
and interacting network. Recent advances in IoT have made
it a promising concept in countless domains, such as smart
homes, personal monitoring devices and enhanced
manufacturing. IoT is now pervasive and new applications
are being used in nearly every conceivable environment.
Scientists in networking, Research and development (R&D)
divisions and many other businesses are competing to
develop an achievable and robust architecture to realise
IoT paradigm [4,5]. On the other hand, WSNs play an
imperative role in IoT paradigms. The characteristics of these
networks, such as flexibility, independency and energy‐
efficiency, have made them a promising candidate for
dominating the information collection task of an IoT
framework [6].

-
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.
© 2021 The Authors. IET Wireless Sensor Systems published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Institution of Engineering and Technology.

IET Wirel. Sens. Syst. 2021;11:45–53. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/wss2 45


46
- POUR
Being one of the most traditional and popular WSN pro-
tocol, Low‐Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy (LEACH)
has been widely studied. Generally, LEACH can increase the
network lifetime compared with flat algorithms [7]. However,
this protocol selects CHs randomly and does not take energy
level, position and other properties of nodes into consideration.
Many LEACH‐based algorithms have been proposed to
decrease the energy consumption and prolong the network
lifetime by selecting the most desirable CHs, such as Advanced
LEACH (ALEACH), EE‐LEACH, LEACH‐N, LEACH‐T etc.
[8–11]. However, these algorithms have been proven to be en-
ergy efficient; either they do not balance the load among CHs or
have high overhead and required computations.
To date, a significant number of studies have sought to
reduce the energy consumption and prolong network lifetime
in WSNs. Many criteria have been examined and among them,
residential energy of nodes and their distances from the sink
can be considered as the main factors on which the prominent
CHs can be selected. However, previous studies were carried
out regardless of the fact that the density of WSNs was dy-
namic in nature and over time. To address this limitation, in
this article, a new energy efficient CH selection algorithm is
proposed called as DRE‐LEACH, which utilises a dynamic
range and the work is based on four criteria: the residual energy
of the node, distance between the nodes and the sink, inter‐
cluster centrality of nodes and finally the number of neigh-
bours of each node. First, at the beginning of each round, a
range is calculated based on the size of the network and alive
nodes. As more nodes become dead, the range will increase
and becomes is proportional to the network density. The
number of neighbours for each node is calculated within its
range; and, therefore, less computation is required. Further-
more, it was considered that the number of neighbours in CH
selection results in an energy balanced algorithm. In addition,
the centrality of each node is calculated within its range and
locally, and only nodes which are within its range are consid-
ered for calculation. According to the four mentioned factors,
a score is assigned to each node, and nodes with the highest
score are selected as CHs in each round. Furthermore, in each
round, 5% of the alive nodes are selected as CHs.
The key features of this article are highlighted as follows:
� Despite several studies, a new energy efficient CH selection
algorithm is proposed which is based on the dynamic
behaviour of the network.
� A variable range is used to localise the required calculations,
which leads to less computation.
� Residual energy of nodes, their distance to sink, the number
of neighbours they have and their local centrality are taken
into consideration which make the algorithm both energy
efficient and energy balanced.
� Range is calculated depending on the network density dur-
ing each round.
The rest of this article is organised as follow. The related
work is presented in Section 2. In Section 3, the proposed
algorithm is presented in detail along with energy models. The
20436394, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/wss2.12007 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [07/02/2023]. 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
AND JAVIDAN
simulation setup and results are presented in Section 4. Finally,
Section 5 concludes the article.
2 | RELATED WORK
One of the most imperative constraints in WSNs is the limited
energy of the sensor nodes. This limitation is due to the fact
that sensors deployed in WSNs run on embedded batteries and
in majority of applications, batteries cannot be replaced.
Therefore, minimising the energy consumption in WSNs has
always been a topic of interest among the researchers. Several
algorithms have been proposed to reduce the energy con-
sumption of WSNs, and in this section, some of these algo-
rithms are reviewed.
Heinzelman et al. [12], proposed a clustering algorithm for
WSNs named LEACH. LEACH uses a distributed algorithm
to form clusters without using any centralised control. It
consists of several rounds in which some nodes are selected as
CHs randomly. Cluster members send their data to the CH and
the CH sends the aggregated data to a sink.
Loscri et al. [13], proposed a two‐level (TL‐LEACH) al-
gorithm as an extended version of the LEACH. The main
difference between TL‐LEACH and LEACH is in the setup‐
phase. In TL‐LEACH, two types of CHs are introduced: the
primary CHs and secondary CHs. First, the primary CHs are
selected in each round after which the secondary CHs are
selected. Primary CHs communicate to BS directly, while
secondary CHs transmit their aggregated data to the primary
CHs they belong to. Each normal node sends its data to a
secondary CH. In this regard, a two‐level hierarchy is con-
structed. Using this approach, the number of nodes trans-
mitting data to BS is effectively reduced. This results in a
decrease in total energy consumption and increasing network
lifetime. Results have shown that if TL‐LEACH is deployed,
the number of rounds consumed when the first node dies
(FND) and the last node dies (LND) is approximately 200 and
500 more than that when the LEACH is used respectively.
Manjula et al. [14], introduced LEACH‐CE in which 5% of
the live nodes are CHs. Before the selection of the CHs begins,
10% of the nodes are forced to go into the sleep mode by the
BS. These nodes neither receive any information from the BS
nor sense any data. All operations are controlled by the BS.
Nodes are selected randomly to go to sleep mode; therefore,
this method prolongs the network lifetime, but the quality of
the network is not guaranteed.
Ali et al. [8], introduced ALEACH. In this study, a new CH
selection is proposed that enables selecting the best suited
node to be selected as the CH. In the proposed algorithm,
nodes generate CHs according to their own autonomous de-
cisions. ALEACH decreases the die rate of the nodes which in
turn increases the network lifetime.
Wang et al. [15], proposed a hybrid cluster selection algo-
rithm to improve LEACH called LEACH‐H. In the proposed
algorithm, in the first round, the sink selects a CH set using a
simulated annealing algorithm. In the following rounds, each
CH is responsible for selecting a new CH for its cluster. The

POUR AND JAVIDAN
proposed algorithm has tried to solve uneven distribution of
CHs in the LEACH and maintain the characteristics of dis-
tribution. LEACH‐H increases the network lifetime and de-
creases the energy consumption.
Farooq et al. [16], introduced a multi‐hope routing with
LEACH called as the MR‐LEACH in which a network is
partitioned into several cluster layers. The CHs in a higher level
transmit their data to sink through the CHs of lower levels.
Ordinary nodes select their CHs based on the received signal
strength indicator (RSSI). The sink is responsible for selecting
the upper layer CHs which act as super CHs for lower level
CHs. Also, the sink is responsible for TDMA scheduling for
each CH. This approach decreases the energy consumption by
using a multi‐hope routing and increases the network lifetime.
Geo et al. [17], proposed an extended LEACH protocol
called ACHTH‐LEACH. In this approach, an adaptive CH
selection and multi‐hop communication is used to increase the
network lifetime and decrease energy consumption. Nodes are
tagged as ‘near’ or ‘far’ depending on their distance from the
sink. While all near nodes are considered as a single cluster, far
nodes are divided into several clusters, using a greedy K‐means
algorithm. In each round, the node with the maximum residual
energy is selected as CH in each cluster. A far CH can either
communicate directly with the sink or through the near CHs.
The result has shown that the network lifetime is doubled
when ACHTH‐LEACH is used rather than LEACH.
Tong et al. [18], proposed an improved LEACH protocol
called LEACH‐B. In this approach, in the first round, CHs are
selected similar to the LEACH protocol; however, in next
rounds, the residual energy of nodes is taken into consider-
ation. In this approach, the number of CHs in each round is
constant and near to optimal. The proposed method has
balanced the network energy consumption and outperforms
LEACH in terms of the network lifetime.
Yektaparast et al. [19], proposed cell‐LEACH in which
each cluster is divided into seven subsections known as cells.
Each cell has its own cell‐head which communicates directly
with its CH. Cell‐heads aggregate data of their own cell and,
therefore, prevent sensors from communicating. Results have
shown that cell‐LEACH outperforms LEACH and LEACH‐C
in terms of energy consumption.
Wang et al. [20], proposed LEACH‐R to enhance the
efficiency of CH selection. In the proposed method, the re-
sidual energy of node is considered as a key factor for CH
selection. In this regard, nodes with low energy have much
lower chance to be selected as CH. Furthermore, relying nodes
in LEACH‐C are selected according to their residual energy
and distance from the sink. Relying nodes are selected among
cluster nodes and they are responsible for forwarding packets
from CHs to the sink. In comparison with the LEACH, the
proposed algorithm saves about 20% of the network energy.
Xu et al. [21], proposed a modified version of LEACH
called E‐LEACH. In this algorithm the residual energy of
nodes is considered in order to balance the network load, and
the round time is changed according to optimal cluster size.
Compared with LEACH, E‐LEACH increases the network
lifetime by 40%.
20436394, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/wss2.12007 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [07/02/2023]. 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
- 47
Haneef et al. [22], proposed an energy efficient routing al-
gorithm based on LEACH called MG‐LEACH. The proposed
algorithm works by minimising the redundancy in WSNs, as
many sensors are deployed in such networks, and redundant data
is sent in these environments. In MG‐LEACH, the redundant
data is discarded by CHs before being forwarded to the sink. The
proposed algorithm uses the redundancy of deployed nodes as a
merit for increasing the network lifetime.
Ahlawat et al. [23], proposed a new version of LEACH
called improved VLEACH to increase the network lifetime. In
this method a vice CH is selected to be considered as an
alternative to the current CH. If the CH dies, it will be replaced
by the selected vice CH and in this way the existence of the CH
is guaranteed to increase the lifetime of the network.
Liao et al. [24], proposed an energy‐balanced clustering
algorithm based on the LEACH protocol relying on the re-
sidual energy and distance. The selection method of the
threshold for choosing CHs is optimised by the proposed al-
gorithm. This algorithm outperforms the traditional LEACH
protocol in terms of balancing node energy consumption,
improving the efficiency of data transmission and prolonging
the network life.
Kole et al. [25], introduced a distance‐based LEACH
algorithm to improve the network performance. The perfor-
mance is improved by applying a cluster formation technique
based on distance parameter. In this study, the cluster forma-
tion phase of the traditional LEACH algorithm is modified,
taking both the distance of the sensor nodes from the CHs and
distance of CHs from the sink into account.
Nayak et al. [26], proposed a fuzzy logic‐based clustering
algorithm called FLLEACH. In this approach, a super CH is
introduced between the CHs and the sink. The aggregated data
is sent to sink from the CHs through the super CH. In
FLLEACH, the residual energy, mobility and centrality are
considered as the three fuzzy inputs to calculate the chance of
each node to become a super CH. The result has shown that it
prolongs the network lifetime and decreases the energy con-
sumption in comparison with the LEACH.
Zhang et al. [27], proposed an intra‐cluster energy efficient
and weighted scheme for WSNs. In the proposed approach, it
is assumed that the sink is equipped with a GPS unit. Similar to
LEACH, the operations are divided into different rounds. The
information about sink location is advertised before the setup
phase is started. Nodes estimate their location based on the
received RSSI and forward their location information back to
the sink. In the steady phase, a weighted relay is elected in each
cluster according to the residual energy of its members and
their distance from sink. CHs aggregate data and send it to the
sink via weighted relays.
Kaddi et al. [28], introduced a new routing protocol for
WSNs called LEACH_KANG. The energy consumption is
decreased by using a hybrid protocol between the LEACH and a
heuristic method. This method uses the kangaroo method which
is an approximation technique based on the stochastic descent
consisting of a random descent from several randomly chosen
points in the search space. The proposed method improves the
lifetime of the network in comparison with the LEACH.

48
- POUR
Al‐Sodairi et al. [29], examined the effectiveness of
LEACH and LEACH‐based clustering algorithms. Then an
improved LEACH clustering protocol called enhanced
multi‐hop LEACH (EM‐LEACH) is proposed. The proposed
algorithm decreases and balances the energy consumption of
the network, leading to longer network lifetime. A new set of
rules for CH selection is proposed based on the residual energy
of nodes. Moreover, a multi‐hop communication model is
used. EM‐LEACH increases both the packet delivery rates and
the network lifetime.
Salem et al. [30], proposed an enhancement of LEACH
protocol. Similar to LEACH, it has two stages, namely: the
setup and steady stages. However, its setup stage is different
from the LEACH protocol. CHs in the proposed algorithm are
selected based on the lowest degree of distance from the sink
in order to reduce the energy consumption. The proposed
algorithm enhances the network lifetime and reduces the po-
wer consumption of the network.
The purpose of this literature review is to provide a
comparison between the LEACH‐based algorithm in WSNs in
terms of energy efficiency and prolonging the network lifetime.
The differences of the extended LEACH‐based clustering
protocols are summarised in Table 1. The studied protocols are
compared in terms of cluster formation type, energy efficiency,
connectivity and performance improvements.
Although, the previous studies improved energy efficiency
in LEACH, most of them did not improve the load balancing
among CHs which leads to an unbalanced network. In the
proposed method in this article, a variable range is defined
depending on which the calculation is done; therefore, less
memory consumption and overhead is guaranteed compared
with the previous studies. In our proposed method, at the
beginning of each round, a variable range is defined based on
the network density. Each node finds its neighbours
according to this range. Then a score is assigned to each
node based on the residual energy, distance between nodes
and the sink, the number of their neighbours and their
centrality. Then, 5% of nodes with the highest score are
selected as CHs in each round. The extensively proposed
algorithm is presented in Section 3.
3 | THE PROPOSED METHOD
In the proposed method, the nodes of the WSN are distributed
in the environment in a random and uniform manner. The
position of nodes is fixed, and the initial energy level of every
node is the same. Nodes have similar hardware capabilities;
therefore, the network is homogeneous. The position of the
sink is fixed and it is situated in the middle of the upper side of
the network outside the area.
Each node is equipped with a GPS module and hence it
knows its own as well as other nodes' and sink's positions.
Similar to LEACH, the proposed method is established over
the round concept and each round consists of two phases. The
first phase is responsible for the CHs’ selection and clustering,
while the second phase is responsible for the creation of
20436394, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/wss2.12007 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [07/02/2023]. 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
AND JAVIDAN
schedule and transferring of data. The second phase is similar
to the steady stage of the traditional LEACH algorithm.
During the first phase, CHs are selected according to their
residential energy, number of neighbours, distance from the
sink and centrality. In the second phase, similar to LEACH, the
data of each node is sent to its corresponding CHs, after which
the aggregated data is sent to the sink.
3.1 | Clustering
In the proposed method, in each round, a variable called range
is calculated and for each node, those nodes whose distance
from this node are less than the range are considered as its
neighbours. The range is calculated as follows:
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
xm � ym
Range ¼ pffiffiffi ð1Þ
n
where, xm, ym and n are the width of the area, the length of the
area and number of alive nodes respectively. When the number
of nodes decreases, the range increases. If the range does not
change according to the number of alive nodes, the number of
clusters will increase dramatically with the gradual demise
of nodes. Therefore, in the proposed method, in the beginning
of each round, the range is calculated based on the density of
the nodes.
After each nodei fills its neighbour table, its centrality is
calculated according to the following equation:
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi�
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi�
ffiffiffiffiffi
no: of nbr �2 2
∑j¼1 xi xj þ yi yj
Centralityi ¼ ð2Þ
no: of nbr
where, no. of nbr is the number of nodei's neighbours, (xi, yi) is
the location of nodei and (xj, yj) is the location of its
neighbours.
In addition, each node's distance from the sink is calculated
according to the following equation:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi�ffiffiffiffi
Di ðxsink xi Þ2 þ ysink yi
2
sink ¼ ð3Þ
where, Di sink is the distance between nodei and sink, (xsink,
ysink) is the location of the sink and (xi, yi) is the location of the
node.
Then, a score is allocated to each node according to the
following criteria: its residual energy, its number of neighbours,
its distance from the sink, its distance from its furthest
neighbour and the distance of its furthest neighbour to the
sink. The score of each node is calculated as follows:
! � �
Ei centralityi 1
Scorei ¼ þ 1 þ ð4Þ
E0 Di f nbr Di sink
 20436394, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/wss2.12007 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [07/02/2023]. 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
POUR AND JAVIDAN
- 49

TA B L E 1 A comparative summarisation of LEACH‐extended protocols

Hop
Method Contributions number Improvements
Loscri et al. [13] � Deploys two levels of CHs Two‐hop � Reduce energy consumption
� Primary CHs communicate to sink directly � Reduce the number of nodes need to send
� Secondary CHs communicate to sink via primary CHs data to sink

Manjula et al. [14] � Nodes randomly selected to go to sleep mode. Single‐hop � Increase network lifetime
� Five per cent of nodes becomes CHs.

Ali et al. [8] � Nodes make autonomous decisions. Single‐hop � Increase network lifetime.
� Long‐distance communication to sink is not required. � Reduce energy consumption.

Wang et al. [15] � Simulated annealing algorithm is used to select the CHs in the first round. Single‐hop � Reduce energy consumption.
� The new CHs are selected by former CHs � Increase network lifetime.

Farooq et al. [16] � Divide the network into different layers Multi‐hop � Reduce energy consumption.
� Sink choose the first layer clusters to act as super clusters for the next level

Geo et al. [17] � Nodes are tagged as near and far Multi‐hop � A more stable routing environment is
� All near nodes are included in one cluster. established
� Far nodes are included in different clusters, using the greedy K‐means algorithm. � Network lifetime is increased.

Tong et al. [18] � Considers the residual energy of nodes. Single‐hop � Balance network energy
� the number of CHs is near optimal. � Increase network lifetime.

Yektaparast et al. � Each cluster is divided into seven cells. Two‐hop � Reduce energy consumption.
[19] � Cell‐heads communicate with CH directly. � Increase network lifetime.

Wang et al. [20] � Relay nodes are used between sink and other CHs. Multi‐hop � Reduce energy consumption.
� Relay nodes are chosen based on residual energy and distance from sink.

Xu et al. [21] � The residual energy of nodes is considered. Single‐hop � Network lifetime is increased.
� Round time is changed based on optimal cluster size.

Haneef et al. [22] � Redundant information is minimised. Single‐hop � Increase network lifetime.
� CHs discard redundant information before sending.

Ahlawat et al. [23] � Use vice CHs as alternative CHs. Single‐hop � Increase network lifetime.
� Take residual energy and distance into consideration.

Liao et al. [24] � Take residual energy and nodes' location information into account. Single‐hop � Balance network energy.
� Optimise the threshold for CH selection. � Increase network lifetime.

Kole et al. [25] � CHs are selected based on their distance with other nodes and their distance to Single‐hop � Increase network lifetime.
sink.

Zhang et al. [27] � Next hop is selected by CH based on residual energy and distance to sink. Multi‐hop � Increase network lifetime.

Nayak et al. [26] � A fuzzy approach is used to select SCHs which are used as relay nodes to transfer Multi‐hop � Increase network lifetime.
data to sink. � Reduce energy consumption.

Kaddi et al. [28] � Kangaroo method adaptive routing protocol is used. Multi‐hop � Increase network lifetime.
� Uses optimal path to transmit data from nodes to sink.

Al‐Sodairi et al. � New rules are introduced for cluster selection and round time computing based Multi‐hop � Increase network lifetime.
[29] on residual energy. � Reduce energy consumption.

Salem et al. [30] � CHs are selected according to the lowest degree of distance from sink. Single‐hop � Reduce power consumption.
� Increase network lifetime.

where, Ei, E0 and Di sink are the current energy of the node,
initial energy of the node and distance between the node and
the sink, respectively; and Di fnbr represents the distance
between the node and its farthest neighbour.
Each node calculates the score of itself and its neighbours;
and if its score is higher than any of its neighbours, it
announces itself as the CH and its neighbours become the
members of its cluster. Nodes which are not within the range
of any CH forward their data directly into the sink. After
clustering has been performed, each member of the cluster
sends its data to its CHs which aggregate the data and send it
to the sink.
The flowchart of the CH selection algorithm is illustrated
in Figure 1. As previously mentioned, the proposed method is

50
- POUR
a round‐based method similar to LEACH; however, its CH
selection algorithm is different.
The pseudo code of the cluster selection stage of the
algorithm is illustrated in Figure 2. As it is clear from the
pseudo code, first the distance between each node and the sink
is calculated. Then, at the beginning of each round, first, the
energy of each node is checked; the nodes with residual energy
higher than zero are considered as alive nodes and labelled as
normal nodes and finally the number of alive nodes (N_alive)
is calculated. At this point, all alive nodes are considered as
normal nodes and no CH is selected yet. Next, based on the
number of alive nodes in the current round, the range (R) is
calculated according to Equation (1), after which, the score of
each node is set to 0 in the current round. In each round, the
neighbours of each node are calculated based on the new range
(R). After determining the neighbours of each node in the
current round, the centrality of each node is calculated ac-
cording to Equation (2). At this point, neighbour nodes ex-
change their info tables. Nodes with highest score among their
neighbours become CHs of the current round and advertise
themselves. If a normal node receives multiple advertisements,
it joins the CH with the highest score. Line 28 of the pseudo
code assures that only 5% of the alive nodes become CHs in
each round.
20436394, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/wss2.12007 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [07/02/2023]. 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
AND JAVIDAN
FIGURE 1 Flowchart of the CH selection
algorithm
3.2 | Energy model
The second phase of the algorithm is similar to the LEACH,
and each ordinary node collects data from the surrounding
environment and sends it to its CH in a TDMA manner.
Depending on the distance between the sensor nodes and their
destinations, the free space and the two‐ray ground propaga-
tion models can be considered for energy consumption. Given
a threshold distance of d0, the free model will be used when
d < d0 as follows [31].
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ϵf s
d0 ¼ ð5Þ
ϵmp
ET x ðl; dÞ ¼ Eelec � l þ ϵf s � l � d 2 ð6Þ
where, ETx(l, d ) is the energy consumption to send l bit of
data, Eelec is the amount of energy reduced by the conveyor and
the receiver circuit, εfs is the amplifier parameters of trans-
formation corresponding to the free space technique and d is
the Euclidian distance between nodes and their destinations.
However, if d > d0, the energy consumption is calculated
by the following equation [31].
 20436394, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/wss2.12007 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [07/02/2023]. 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
POUR AND JAVIDAN
- 51

TA B L E 2 Simulation parameters

Parameter Value
Simulation area 70 m � 70 m

Number of nodes 100

Node positions Random

Initial energy of each node 0.5 (J)

Sink coordinates (35,47.25)

Energy for transferring of each bit 50 * 0.000000001 (J)

Energy of receiving 50 * 0.000000001 (J)

Energy for free space model 10 * 0.000000000001 (J)

Energy for multi‐path model 10 * 0.000000000001 (J)

Energy for data aggregation 5 * 0.000000001 (J)

Packet size (bit) 4000

FIGURE 3 The round when the first node died

FIGURE 2 Pseudo code of the CH selection stage
ET x ðl; dÞ ¼ Eelec � l þ ϵmp � l � d 4 ð7Þ
where, εmp, is the amplifier parameter of the transformation
corresponding to the multi‐path fading model.
4 | SIMULATION RESULTS AND
ANALYSIS
MATLAB R2015b is used to simulate the proposed algorithm.
The results have been compared with LEACH, EM‐LEACH
and MR‐LEACH methods and illustrated as diagrams. The
parameters of the simulations are provided in Table 2. To
provide a fair comparison, and simulations have been run
under the same circumstances.
Figure 3 shows the result in which round the first, and the
entire nodes die for each method. The first node dies in
MR‐LEACH method far sooner than other methods. The first
node of LEACH and our proposed method dies almost after a
similar number of rounds has passed; however, the first node
of EM‐LEACH algorithm dies sooner than these methods.
With the increase in the number of rounds, the difference
between these algorithms become clearer. However, all nodes
in LEACH die before round 1200, the last node in EM‐
LEACH dies at round 1390 and the last node on applying
MR‐LEACH and our algorithm dies at rounds 1509 and 1593
respectively.
The energy consumptions of LEACH, EM‐LEACH,
MR‐LEACH and the proposed algorithm are depicted in
Figure 4. Initially, there are 100 nodes in networks and each
node has 5 J of energy. Therefore, the total energy for all
methods at first is 500 J. LEACH algorithm loses 50% of its
energy in approximately 200 rounds. The equivalent figure for
MR‐LEACH is around 300 rounds. EM‐LEACH loses 50% of
its energy before 200 rounds, and the proposed algorithm loses
50% of its energy almost after 400 rounds. The total network
lifetime has increased by 32%, using the proposed algorithm,
compared with LEACH.

52
- POUR
FIGURE 4 The energy consumption of network
FIGURE 5 The relation between delivered packets and the number of
alive nodes
The number of packets delivered to the sink per number of
alive nodes is depicted in Figure 5 for LEACH, MR‐LEACH,
EM‐LEACH and our proposed algorithm. It is conspicuous
that EM‐LEACH and the proposed algorithm outperform
LEACH and MR‐LEACH. While the proposed algorithm
performs better than EM‐LEACH, the difference between
these two algorithms is not significant. Therefore, network
reliability is improved by the proposed algorithm.
The relation between the number of delivered packets and
energy consumption for LEACH, MR‐LEACH, EM‐LEACH
and our algorithm is illustrated in Figure 6 which can be
considered as another metric for network reliability. It is clear
that the energy consumption of the proposed algorithm and
EM‐LEACH algorithm is far less than LEACH and MR‐
LEACH algorithms. The proposed algorithm reduces the en-
ergy consumption by trying to select CHs that minimise the
total distance between nodes and their respective CHs. It also
uses a different range for its calculation in each round, and the
range increases when the network density decreases, which in
turn reduces the chance of nodes to become isolated and sends
their data directly into the sink.
20436394, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/wss2.12007 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [07/02/2023]. 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
AND JAVIDAN
F I G U R E 6 The relation between the number of delivered packets and
energy consumption
5 | CONCLUSION
The purpose of this study was to propose a new CH selection
algorithm to improve the network lifetime and reduce energy
consumption in WSNs. We proposed a clustering method
which took the distance between nodes and sink, network
density and residual energy of nodes into consideration before
choosing CHs. It also makes the calculation in each round
based on a variable range which is defined based on the
network density. In this regard, less calculation is required.
Moreover, due to the fact that when more nodes die, the range
decreases. The network connectivity and the number of direct
transmissions also decrease between the nodes and the sink.
Considering the number of neighbours, residual energy and
centrality helps to have an energy balanced network.
The proposed method was evaluated by MATALAB
R2015b and compared with LEACH, MR‐LEACH and
EM‐LEACH and the results showed that the proposed algo-
rithm outperforms these methods in terms of increasing the
network lifetime, decreasing energy consumption and
improving network reliability. Furthermore, as the number of
rounds increases, the declined power consumption will reduce
to a great extent.
The subject of decreasing power consumption in WSNs
has always been a topic of interest due to the effect of the
network lifetime. A future objective of this study is to extend
the proposed method over a multi‐hop routing between
different CHs. In the current study, we employed the single
hop routing in which CHs directly communicate with the BS. It
has been proved that multi‐hop communication in WSNs leads
to less energy consumption. Therefore, if some CHs play the
role of relay nodes and other CHs send their data to the BS
through these nodes, the energy consumption of the network
will be decreased. Our goal is to define a multi‐hope routing
protocol in which the selected CHS send their data according
to the present approach through the relay nodes rather directly.
However, in this case, we should keep routing tables updated
since routes in WSNs dynamically change.

POUR AND JAVIDAN
OR CID
Sina Einavi Pour https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3818-9625
RE FE R ENC ES
1. Yetgin, H., et al.: A survey of network lifetime maximization techniques
in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 19(2), 828–854
(2017)
2. Curry, R. M., Smith, J. C.: A survey of optimization algorithms for
wireless sensor network lifetime maximization. Comput. Ind. Eng. 101,
145–166 (2016)
3. Ghasempour, A.: Internet of things in smart grid: architecture, applica-
tions, services, key technologies, and challenges. Inventions. 4(1), 22
(2019)
4. Al‐Turjman, F. M., Al‐Fagih, A. E., Hassanein, H. S.: A novel cost‐
effective architecture and deployment strategy for integrated RFID and
WSN systems. In: International Conference on Computing, Networking
and Communications (ICNC), Maui, HI, pp. 835–839 (2012)
5. Al‐Turjman, F.: Impact of user's habits on smartphones' sensors: an
overview. HONET‐ICT, Nicosia, pp. 70–74 (2016)
6. Al‐Turjman, F.: Hybrid approach for mobile couriers election in smart‐
cities. In: 41st IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN),
United Arab Emirates, Dubai, pp. 507–510 (2016)
7. Ai, Z. Y., Zhou, Y. T., Song, F.: A smart collaborative routing protocol for
reliable data diffusion in IoT scenarios. Sensors. 18(6), 1926 (2018)
8. Ali, M. S., Dey, T., Biswas, R.: ALEACH: Advanced LEACH routing
protocol for wireless microsensor networks. In: International
Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, Dhaka, pp. 909–
914 (2008)
9. Mao, L., Zhang, Y.: An energy‐efficient LEACH algorithm for wireless
sensor networks. In: 36th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Dalian,
China, pp. 9005–9009 (2017)
10. Karmaker, A., et al.: An efficient cluster head selection strategy for
provisioning fairness in wireless sensor networks. In: IEEE International
WIE Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, WIECON‐
ECE, Pune, India, pp. 217–220 (2016)
11. Thangaramya, K., et al.: An energy efficient clustering approach using
spectral graph theory in wireless sensor networks. In: 2nd International
Conference on Recent Trends and Challenges in Computational Models
(ICRTCCM), Tindivanam, India, pp. 126–129 (2017)
12. Heinzelman, W. R., Chandrakasan, A., Balakrishnan, H.: Energy‐efficient
communication protocol for wireless microsensor networks. In: Pro-
ceedings on 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences, Maui, HI, p. 10 (2000)
13. Loscri, V., Morabito, G., Marano, S.: A two‐levels hierarchy for low‐
energy adaptive clustering hierarchy (TL‐LEACH). In: IEEE 1999 62nd
Vehicular Technology Conference, Vol. 62(3), 1809 (2005)
14. Manjula, S. H., et al.: Base‐station controlled clustering scheme in wire-
less sensor networks. In: 1st IFIP Wireless Days, United Arab Emirates,
Dubai, pp. 1–5 (2008)
15. Wang, W., et al.: Leach‐H: an improved routing protocol for collaborative
sensing networks. In: International Conference on Wireless Communi-
cations & Signal Processing, Nanjing, China, pp. 1–5 (2009)
16. Farooq, M. O., Dogar, A. B., Shah, G. A.: Multi‐hop routing with low
energy adaptive clustering hierarchy. In: Fourth International Conference
on Sensor Technologies and Applications, MR‐LEACH, Venice, pp. 262–
268 (2010)
20436394, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/wss2.12007 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [07/02/2023]. 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
- 53
17. Guo, L. Q., et al.: Improvement on LEACH by combining adaptive
cluster head election and two‐hop transmission. In: International Con-
ference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Qingdao, China,
pp. 1678–1683 (2010)
18. Tong, M., Tang, M.: LEACH‐B: an improved LEACH protocol for
wireless sensor network. In: 6th International Conference on Wireless
Communications Networking and Mobile Computing, WiCOM,
Chengdu, China, pp. 1–4 (2010)
19. Yektaparast, A., Nabavi, F. H., Sarmast, A.: An improvement on LEACH
protocol (Cell‐LEACH). In: 14th International Conference on Advanced
Communication Technology (ICACT), South Korea, PyeongChang, pp.
992–996 (2012)
20. Wang, N., Zhu, H.: An energy efficient algrithm based on LEACH
protocol. In: International Conference on Computer Science and Elec-
tronics Engineering, Hangzhou, China, pp. 339–342 (2012)
21. Xu, J., et al.: Improvement of LEACH protocol for WSN. In: 9th In-
ternational Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery,
Sichuan, China, pp. 2174–2177 (2012)
22. Haneef, M., Wenxun, Z., Deng, Z.: Multi group based LEACH an energy
efficient routing algorithm for wireless sensor network. In: 14th Inter-
national Conference on Advanced Communication Technology
(ICACT), MG‐LEACH, PyeongChang, South Korea, pp. 179–183 (2012)
23. Ahlawat, A., Malik, V.: An extended vice‐cluster selection approach to
improve V leach protocol in WSN. In: Third International Conference
on Advanced Computing and Communication Technologies (ACCT),
Rohtak, India, pp. 236–240 (2013)
24. Liao, Q., Zhu, H.: An energy balanced clustering algorithm based on
LEACH protocol. Appl. Mech. Mater. 341‐342, 1138–1143 (2013)
25. Kole, S., Vhatkar, K. N., Bag, V. V.: Distance based cluster formation
technique for LEACH protocol in wireless sensor network. Int. J. Appl.
Innov. Eng. Manag. (IJAIEM). 3(3), 334–338 (2014)
26. Nayak, P., Devulapalli, A.: A fuzzy logic‐based clustering algorithm for
WSN to extend the network lifetime. IEEE Sensor J. 16(1), 137–144 (2016)
27. Zhang, J., et al.: LEACH‐WM: weighted and intra‐cluster multi‐hop
energy‐efficient algorithm for wireless sensor networks. In: 35th Chinese
Control Conference, CCC, Chengdu, China, pp. 8325–8329 (2016)
28. Kaddi, M., Benahmed, K., Omari, M.: A new routing protocol for wsn
based on leach protocol and kangaroo method. In: International Con-
ference on Mathematics and Information Technology (ICMIT), Leach‐
kang, Adrar, Algeria, pp. 273–278 (2017)
29. Al‐Sodairi, S., Ouni, R.: Reliable and energy‐efficient multi‐hop LEACH‐
based clustering protocol for wireless sensor networks. Sustain. Comput.:
Inform. Syst. 20, 1–13 (2018)
30. Salem, A. O. A., Shudifat, N.: Enhanced LEACH protocol for increasing
a lifetime of WSNs. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 23(5‐6), 901–907 (2019)
31. Ramesh, K., Somasundaram, D. K.: A comparative study of clusterhead
selection algorithms in wireless sensor networks. arXiv Preprint
1205.1673 (2012)
How to cite this article: Pour SE, Javidan R. A new
energy aware cluster head selection for LEACH in
wireless sensor networks. IET Wirel. Sens. Syst.
2021;11:45–53. https://doi.org/10.1049/wss2.12007