Concentric Cluster Based PEGASIS for

Wireless Sensor Networks

A dissertation preliminary report submitted in partial fulfillment
for the award of the
Degree of
Master of Technology
in
Signal Processing

Supervisor:
Dr. P. P. Bhattacharya
FET, MITS

Submitted by:
Neha Rathi
Enroll.No. 110410

December 2012
Mody Institute of Technology & Science
(Deemed University u/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956)
Faculty of Engineering & Technology
Lakshmangarh, Sikar 332311 (Rajasthan)

Mody Institute of Technology & Science

(A Deemed University u/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956)
Lakshmangarh, Sikar-332311 (Rajasthan)
Faculty of Engineering & Technology
Phone: (01573) 225001 to 225012 (12 lines) Fax: (01573) 225042
E-mail: dean.fet@mitsuniversity.ac.in
Website: www.mitsuniversity.ac.in

Date:21/12/2012

Certificate
This is to certify that Ms. Neha Rathi (Enrolment No. 110410) has successfully
completed the dissertation preliminary entitled Concentric Cluster Based
PEGASIS for Wireless Sensor Networks and has submitted the report in
partial fulfillment for the award of the degree of Master of Technology in Signal
Processing to Department of E&CE, Mody Institute of Technology and Science.
To the best of my knowledge, the work is original and has not been submitted
elsewhere for any other academic attainment.
It is further certified that Ms. Neha Rathi has fulfilled all the requirements laid
down by Faculty of Engineering & Technology, Mody Institute of Technology
and Science, Lakshmangarh for the submission of report.

(Supervisor Name)
Prof. P.P. Bhattacharya

Mody Institute of Technology & Science

(A Deemed University u/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956)
Lakshmangarh, Sikar-332311 (Rajasthan)
Faculty of Engineering & Technology
Phone: (01573) 225001 to 225012 (12 lines) Fax: (01573) 225042
E-mail: dean.fet@mitsuniversity.ac.in
Website: www.mitsuniversity.ac.in

Date: 21/12/2012

Examiner Certificate

The dissertation preliminary entitled Concentric Cluster Based PEGASIS

for Wireless Sensor Networks by Ms. Neha Rathi (Enrolment No.110410) is
approved in partial fulfillment for the award of the degree of Master of
Technology in Signal Processing to Department of E&CE, Mody Institute of
Technology and Science, Lakshmangarh.

H.O.D. (ECE Deptt.)

Dean/ Deans Nominee

External Examiner

Contents
Page no.
Acknowledgement
Abstract
List of Figures
List of Tables
List of Abbreviations

iv
v
vi
viii
ix

Chapter 1
1.

Introduction

1.1

Aim of the Dissertation

1.2

Organization of the Dissertation

Chapter 2
2.

Wireless Sensor Networks

Chapter 3
3.

Routing Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks

3.1

3.2

3.3

Flat-Based Routing

6
6

3.1.1

Flooding and Gossiping

3.1.2

SPIN

3.1.3

Directed Diffusion

3.1.4

Energy-Aware Routing

10

Hierarchical Based Routing

11

3.2.1

U-LEACH

12

3.2.2

TEEN

13

Location-Based Routing

13

GAF and HGAF

13

3.3.1
CHAPTER 4
4.

Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information System

15
15

4.1

Literature Review

15

4.2

PEGASIS

15

4.2.1

Chain Construction

15

4.2.2

Data Gathering

16

4.3

Advantages of PEGASIS over LEACH

16

4.4

Drawback of the PEGASIS Protocol

17

4.5

PEGASIS with CDMA nodes

17

Chapter 5
5

18

Performance Analysis of Energy Consumption in PEGASIS

5.1

Radio Model

18

5.2

Effect of Parameters on Energy Consumption

19

Chapter 6
6

22

Design and Simulation for Concentric Cluster Based PEGASIS

22

6.1

Level Assignment

22

6.2

Chain Construction in the Level Area

23

6.3

Simulation Scenario and Results

23

Chapter 7
7

18

26

Conclusion and future work

26

References

27

Accepted and Published Paper

29

List of Figures
PageNo.
4

Fig.2.1

Components of Sensor Node.

Fig.3.1

The implosion problem.

Fig.3.2

The overlap problem.

Fig. 3.3

SPIN Protocol

Fig.3.4

Network connectivity

10

Fig.3.5

Path selected in energy aware routing

Fig.3.6

An overview of U-LEACH

Fig. 4.1

Construction of chain in PEGASIS

16

Fig. 4.2

Describing data fusion at the head node and transmitting

18

:
10

:
12
:

it to BS

Fig. 5.1

Number of nodes vs Energy Consumption with different

20

sets of data bits.

Fig.5.2

Number of nodes vs Energy Consumption with different

20

sets of Eelec.

Fig.5.3

Number of nodes vs Energy consumption with different sets

20

of Eamp.

Fig.5.4

Energy consumption in one round vs neighbor nodes

21

Fig.5.5

Energy consumption vs nodes aggregating data

21

Fig.6.1

Level assignment and chain construction

22

Fig.6.2

Creation of nodes

23

Fig.6.3

Neighbor of each node within 100 meter range

24

Fig.6.4

Level assignment

24

Fig.6.5

Neighbor of each node at different level assignment

25

List of Tables

Table I

Variables

PageNo.
19

List of Abbreviations
WSNs

Wireless Sensor Networks

QoS

Quality of Service

ADCs

Analog to Digital Converters

REQ

Request

ACK

Acknowledge

CHs

Cluster-Heads

GAF

Geographic Adaptive Fidelity

HGAF

Hierarchical Geographic Fidelity

BS

Base- Station

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION

The sensor nodes are constrained to limited resources itself, so the main target is on how
to design an effective and energy aware protocols in order to enhance the network lifetime for
specific application environment. Classically most routing protocol is classified as datacentric, hierarchical and location based protocols depending on the network structure and
applications. Energy Efficiency, Scalability, Latency, Fault-Tolerance, Accuracy, and Quality
of Service (QoS), which we must carefully consider when we design or choose the routing
protocols in WSNs. Yet the common aim is to build a steady transmission path in a quickrapid and lowcost manner.
AIM OF THE DISSERTATION
Objective of the dissertation is to design the enhanced PEGASIS protocol (one of the
routing protocol) based on concentric clustering scheme which can be used to minimize the
problem of redundant data transmission since one of the nodes in the chain is selected as a
head node regardless of the base station location. The main idea of the concentric clustering
scheme is to consider the location of the base station to enhance its performance and to
prolong the lifetime of the wireless sensor networks. In addition to this, the performance of
concentric cluster based PEGASIS for WSNs is also analyzed.
In present work, the sensor network is divided into several clusters and each node in the
sensor networks is assigned its own level from the base station. In each level area, the chain
construction is started at the farthest node from the base station using the greedy algorithm.
This process of the chain construction is the same with the current PEGASIS protocol. The
performance of enhanced PEGASIS protocol based on concentric clustering scheme for
wireless sensor network is also analyzed.
ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSERTATION
The dissertation is organized as follows: Chapter 2 includes the introduction of wireless
sensor networks. Routing protocols for wireless sensor networks is organized in chapter 3.
Basic concept of PEGASIS is described in chapter 4. Chapter 5 shows the performance
analysis of energy consumption in PEGASIS. Design and Simulation scenario for cluster
based PEGASIS is describe in chapter 6. Conclusion and future work is shown in chapter 7.

Chapter 2
WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORK (WSNs)

Wireless sensor networks have seen extensive proliferation of applications and interest in
research and industry. Such networks can be densely deployed over a diverse geographic
area ranging from 10s of meters to several hundreds of kilometers through deploying small,
low cost devices that can observe and influence the physical world around them by gathering
status information and then transforming this into radio signals. Such signals are then
transmitted to a local sink which may be connected to a gateway to send the data to external
network such as internet. The data thus received may be analyzed and appropriate
decision/action taken depending on the type of application. Unfortunately, these sensors
suffer from resources constraint and power limitation as these sensors are usually deployed in
remote places that are not easy to reach. Inevitably, there is a finite life time duration for such
devices and new sensors have to be deployed to replace the old ones. It is some of these
limitations that has shown an increasing interest from the scientific community to research in
such devises that would enhance the longevity and coverage of the devices by using various
new technology developments in this field. The main emphasis is on maximizing the life time
of sensors and to use the limited resources efficiently by adopting mechanisms, algorithms
and protocols that consider these limited resources as main priorities and challenges to
produce efficient and reliable networks [1].
A sensor node is made up of four basic components, as shown in Figure 2.1, sensing unit, a
processing unit, a transceiver unit, and a power unit. They may also have additional
application-dependent components such as a location finding system, power generator, and
mobilizer. Sensing units are usually composed of two subunits:
I. Sensors
II. Analog-to-digital converters (ADCs).
The analog signals produced by the sensors based on the observed phenomenon are converted
to digital signals by the ADC, and then fed into the processing unit. The processing unit,
which is generally associated with a small storage unit, manages the procedures that make the
sensor node collaborate with the other nodes to carry out the assigned sensing tasks. A
transceiver unit connects the node to the network. One of the most important components of a
sensor node is the power unit. Power units may be supported by power scavenging units such
as solar cells. There are also other subunits that are application-dependent. Most of the sensor
network routing techniques and sensing tasks require knowledge of location with high
accuracy. Thus, it is common that a sensor node has a location finding system. A mobilizer

may sometimes be needed to move sensor nodes when it is required to carry out the assigned
tasks.

Fig.2.1 Components of Sensor Node.

Sensor networks are application specific that is design requirements of a sensor network
change with application. Position awareness of sensor nodes is important since data
collection is normally based on the location. Routing mechanisms consider the inherent
features of WSNs and the application and architecture requirements. The task of finding and
maintaining routes in WSNs is nontrivial since energy restrictions and sudden changes in
node status cause frequent and unpredictable topological changes. To minimize energy
consumption, routing techniques proposed in the literature for WSNs employ some well
known routing tactics as well as tactics special to WSNs. Classification of almost all of the
routing protocols can be according to the network structure as flat, hierarchical, or location
based. In flat networks, all nodes play the same role while hierarchical protocols aims at
clustering the nodes so that cluster heads can do some aggregation and reduction of data in
order to save energy. Location-based protocols utilize the position information to relay the
data to the desired regions rather than the whole network. In this work, flat based,
hierarchical based and location based protocols are discussed and classified. The various
protocols include SPIN, DD, ACQUIRE, RR, COUGAR, LEACH, TEEN, APTEEN,
PEGASIS, GEAR and GAF. SPIN, DD and RR. The characteristics of these protocols along
with their advantages and disadvantages are presented in the paper. Finally a comparison is
made followed by a conclusion [2]. The advantages and disadvantages of wireless sensor
networks can be summarized as follows [3]:
Advantages:

Network setups can be done without fixed infrastructure.

Ideal for the non-reachable places such as across the sea, mountains, rural areas or
deep forests.

Flexible if there is ad hoc situation when additional workstation is required.

Implementation cost is cheap.

Disadvantages:
Less secure because hackers can enter the access point and get all the information.
Lower speed compared to a wired network.
More complex to configure than a wired network.
Easily affected by surroundings.

Chapter 3
ROUTING PROTOCOLS FOR WSNs
The sensor nodes are constrained to limited resources itself, so the main target is on how
to design an effective and energy awareness protocols in order to enhance the networks
lifetime for specific application environment. Since sensor nodes are not given a unified ID
for identification and much redundant data collected at destination nodes, energy efficiency,
scalability, latency, fault-tolerance, accuracy and QOS, are some aspects which must be kept
in mind while designing the routing protocols in wireless sensor networks.
Classically most routing protocol could be classified as data-centric, hierarchical and location
based protocols depending on the network structure and application. A few distinct protocols
are based on the network flow and QOS awareness. Routing protocols can be classified into
multipath-based, query based and negotiation based, QOS based, or coherent based routing
techniques depends on protocol operation. Routing protocol depending on network structure
is discussed here.
FLAT BASED ROUTING
It is not possible to assign global identifiers to each node in wireless sensor networks
because of dense deployment and dynamic environment of sensor nodes. Random
deployment and dynamics make it hard to select a specific set of sensor nodes to be queried.
Thus routing in the system should operate autonomously, changing its configuration as
required.
Data is usually transmitted within deployment region from every sensor node with significant
redundancy. Since this is vulnerable in terms of energy consumption. Routing protocol is
considered to aggregate data from the cluster of sensor nodes, which helps in saving energy
and transmit the data to destination. This consideration has led to data-centric routing, where
all nodes are typically equal and acts as same functionality.
In data-centric routing, sinks sends queries to certain regions and waits for data from sensors
located in the selected regions. To facilitate data-centric characteristics of sensor queries, an
attribute-based naming scheme is used to specify the properties of data.
Flooding and Gossiping
Flooding and gossiping [4] are the most traditional network routing. They do not need to
know the network topology or any routing algorithms. In flooding mechanism, each sensor
receives a data packet and then broadcasts to all neighboring nodes. When the packet arrives

at the destination or the maximum number of hops is reached, the broadcasting process is
stopped. On the other hand, gossiping is slightly enhanced version of flooding where the
receiving node sends the packet to randomly selected neighbors, which picks another random
neighbor to forward the packet to and so on. Although flooding is very easy, it has several
drawbacks like implosion, overlap and resource blindness problem.

Fig.3.1. The implosion problem.

Fig.3.2. The overlap problem.

Implosion caused by duplicate message sent to same node as shown in figure 3.1. A starts
by flooding its data to all its neighbors. Two copies of data eventually end at node D. The
system wastes energy and bandwidth.
Overlap caused when two nodes sensing the same region send similar packets to the same
neighbor and resource blindness by consuming large amount of energy without consideration
for the energy constraints. Overloading problem shown in figure 3.2.
Gossiping avoids the problem of implosion by sending information to a random neighbor
instead of classical broadcasting mechanism sending packets to all neighbors. However,
gossiping caused another problem of delay in a propagation of data among sensor nodes.
SPIN
Joanna Kulik et al. in [4][5] proposed a family of adaptive protocol, called SPIN (Sensor
Protocol for Information via Negotiation) that efficiently disseminates information among
sensors in an energy-constrained wireless sensor network and overcome the problem of
implosion and overlap caused in classic flooding. Nodes running a SPIN communication

protocol name their data using high-level data descriptors, called metadata. SPIN nodes
negotiate with each other before transmitting data. Negotiation helps to ensure that the
transmission of redundant data throughout the network is eliminated and only useful
information will be transferred.

Fig.3.3. SPIN Protocol. Node A starts by advertising its data to node B (a). Node B responds by
sending a request to node A (b). After receiving the request data (c). Node B then sends out
advertisements to its neighbors (d) who in turn send requests back to B (e-f)

SPIN nodes use three types of messages to communicate between nodes. These are ADV,
REQ, DATA. ADV message allow sensor to advertise a particular meta-data. REQ for
request data. DATA message is actual sensor data with a meta-data header. ADV and REQ
messages are smaller and cheaper to send and receive because they contain meta-data. SPIN
protocol is suggested in figure 3.3. Node A sends an ADV message to Node B, after
receiving a packet node B checks whether it possesses al the advertised data (a). If not, node
B sends a REQ message back to node A, listing all of the data it would like to acquire (b).
When node A receives the REQ packet, it retrieves the requested data and sends it back to
node B as a DATA message (c). Node B, in turn, sends ADV messages advertising the new
data it received from node A to all of its neighbors (d). It does not send an advertisement
back to node A, because it knows that node A already has the data. These nodes then send
advertisements of the new data to all of their neighbors, and the protocol continues. Nodes
are not required to respond to every message in the protocol. One neighbor does not send an
REQ packet back to node B (e). This would occur if that node already possessed the data
being advertised.
The disadvantage of SPIN protocol is that it is not sure about the data will certainly reached
the target or not and it is also not good for high-density distribution of nodes. Other drawback
is that if the nodes that are interested in the data are far away from the source node and the

nodes between source and destination are not interested in that data, such data will not be
delivered to the destination at all. Therefore, SPIN is not a good choice for applications.
Directed Diffusion
Directed diffusion protocol in highly mobile environments will lead to much network
overhead and poor performance. T. Purusothaman et al. [6] proposed a simple solution to
improve the performance of directed diffusion in mobile scenario. To achieve this, they
modified the interest propagation mechanism and control the interest propagation with
respect to the mobility as well as the nearby density of the propagating node.
In the proposed method, a sensor node will propagate the interest message only if the
condition is based on speed of the node and the density of nearby nodes is satisfied. In the
proposed this method, if a node receives a packet then the node will check the Packet Pi that
is a new packet or not. If the received packet is not a new one then the node will recheck the
packet is already been forwarded. If that is the case then the packet will be dropped, on the
contrary if the packet is not forwarded then the interest timer is updated. If the packet is new
and it is an interest packet then the number of adjacent nodes and mobility factors are
calculated. Ni is number of nearby nodes for a particular node; the mobility factor is defined
as the ratio of node speed and the expected node speed. If Ni is less than minimum expected
Neighbors then propagate the interest packets into the network. Else if the Mobility factor is
less than mobility threshold then propagate the interest packets into the Network. If both the
conditions are not satisfied then it will not propagate the interest. If the received packet is not
an interest packet then it is handled normally.
The proposed directed diffusion protocol implies the better performance than other protocols
in terms of overhead, MAC load and dropped packets. This algorithm is very well
recommended for mobile and very dense networks.
Energy-Aware Routing
Energy aware routing protocol is efficient method to minimize the energy cost for
communication and can increase the network lifetime. Unlike directed diffusion, data
transmission is done through several optimum paths at higher rates instead of transmitting
through one optimal path. The transmission path selection is done by choosing a probability
value of each path. The probability value balanced the initial network load and enhanced the
network lifetime.

Fig.3.4. Network connectivity

Fig.3.5. Path selected in energy aware routing

An energy aware routing protocol is proposed in [7] which provide a reliable transmission
environment with low energy consumption. The energy efficient routing algorithm proposed
is used for making decision on which neighbor a sensor node should forward the data
message. A node is selected on the basis of its residual energy level and signal strength.
Ideally, the greater the energy of the node, is more likely to be selected on the next hop. The
nodes which are not selected will move to the sleep state to conserve power. Network
connectivity is shown in figure 3.4 [7]. There are many intermediate nodes available in the
network. All nodes within the radio range of the nodes receive the broadcast message at the
same time. When the sink initially broadcast the message, the nodes A, E and G receive the
message. Assume that the available energy at A is larger than at E and G, and also A is within
the required signal strength threshold, hence node A is selected to broadcast the message to
the neighboring nodes. The process continues and node B which is selected sends out the
broadcast message which is received by nodes F and C, it is found that both F and C have the
same energy level and are within the required signal strength threshold.
So both F and C start a back-off timer and if the back-off timer of node F ends before C an
implicit acknowledgement is sent by node F which is also received by node C, and so node C
stops its back-off timer as shown in Figure 3.5. When the broadcast message reaches the
target source, the source transmits the route reply packet through the nodes it received the
broadcast message. This protocol provides reliable packet delivery for unicast transmission.
Data is cached in the sender until an ACK is received from the receiver. If no ACK is

received within a timeout period, an error report is generated and the data will be sent back to
the original source of this data in order to retransmit.
The disadvantage is that energy-aware routing needs to exchange local information between
neighbor nodes and all nodes have a unified address, which enlarges the price of building
routing paths.
HIERARCHICAL BASED ROUTING (CLUSTERING)
Hierarchical routing is a guarantee approach for point-to- point routing with very small
routing state [8]. Scalability is one of the essential design features of the sensor networks. A
single-gateway architecture can cause the gateway to overload which might cause a break in
communication and tracking of events is unhealthy. Other major disadvantage is that long
haul communication is not possible because it is not scalable for large set of sensors. To
overcome these drawbacks network clustering has been pursued in some routing approaches.
Hierarchical or cluster based methods are well known techniques with special advantage of
scalability and efficient communication. Nodes play different roles in the network.
Hierarchical routing maintains the energy consumption of sensor nodes and performs data
aggregation which helps in decreasing the number of transmitted messages to base station.
The whole WSNs is divided into a number of clusters in term with the specific rules. Some
hierarchical protocols are discussed here.
U-LEACH
LEACH (LowEnergy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy), a clustering-based protocol that
utilizes randomized rotation of Cluster-Heads (CHs) to evenly distribute the energy among
the sensors in the network.

But LEACH cannot select CHs uniformly throughout the

network. Therefore there is the possibility that the elected CHs will be concentrated in certain
area of the network. Hence, some nodes will not have any CHs in their vicinity. The proposed
approach U-LEACH [9] is an approach to address this problem. It wisely organizes the
network through consistent distribution of clustering as shown in figure 3.6. LEACH Protocol
works in the following steps : Step 1: Decide CHs and broadcast advertisement. Step 2:
Nodes transmit membership. Step 3: Heads broadcast schedule. Step 4: Nodes transmit data.
Step 5: Heads compress data and send to base station. Step 6: New turn begins go to Step 1.
If the coverage area of each CH can be predefined before Step 1, then the limitation of
uniform distribution of CHs can be improved. The CHs will be efficiently allocated
throughout the network. Initially all nodes are homogeneous. The node, which has the
maximum remaining energy, advertises itself as the first CH. Then the first CH selects an

area, no other node in that particular area can advertise itself as CH. After that another CH is
selected from rest of the network. In this way the whole network is divided into some
predefined areas. Each area contains one CH and all the nodes in that area constructs a
cluster, not a single node will remain outside these areas. Thus the CHs are uniformly
distributed throughout the network. A uniform distribution technique of U-LEACH for
selecting CHs can not only reduce energy consumption but also increase nodes life time.

Fig.3.6. An overview of U-LEACH

TEEN (Threshold sensitive Energy Efficient sensor Network)

TEEN is a cluster based routing protocol based on LEACH which improves it at the same
time by transferring the data less frequently. The network is considered as collection of
simple nodes, first-level cluster heads and second-level cluster heads. LEACH strategy used
in this protocol for cluster formation. After forming the clusters, the cluster head broadcasts
two thresholds namely hard and soft thresholds to all the nodes; which are the key feature of
TEEN. Hard threshold is the minimum threshold used to trigger a sensor node to switch on its
transmitter and therefore transmit to the cluster head. Thus, the hard threshold will ask the
sensor node to perform transmission only when the sensed attribute is in the required range
and reduces the number of transmissions significantly. Once a node senses a value at or
beyond the hard threshold, the data is transmitted only when the attribute changes by an
amount greater than or equal to the soft threshold. That is, soft threshold reduces the number
of frequent transmissions even after the hard threshold is crossed if there is no change or little
change in the value of sensed attribute compared to soft threshold [10].
LOCATION-BASED ROUTING
Most of the routing protocols require location information for sensor nodes in wireless
sensor networks. Location information is required to calculate the distance between two

particular nodes on the basis of signal strength so that energy consumption can be estimated.
Location information is also utilized in routing data in energy efficient way when addressing
scheme for sensor network is not known. It is worth noting that there have been many
location-based protocols in Ad Hoc networks and it makes great effects when we transplant
those research achievements for wireless sensor networks in some ways.
GAF and HGAF
GAF [11], is adaptive fidelity algorithm in which large numbers of sensor nodes are
placed in observed area and only few nodes in the observed area are selected to transmit
messages, while the other nodes sleep. In this way, GAF reduces the number of nodes needed
to form a network and saves nodes battery.
Hierarchical Geographical Adaptive Fidelity (HGAF) saves much more battery by enlarging
the cell of GAF by adding a layered structure for selecting an active node in each cell. GAF
saves battery power by enlarging the size of the cell. The connectivity between active nodes
in two adjacent cells must be guaranteed because active nodes works as cluster heads to
deliver packets between cells. Because of this limitation, GAF needs an active node in every
area whose maximum size is R2/5.
HGAF limits the position of active node in a cell and synchronizes the position in each cell
among all cells. Through this modification, the connectivity between active nodes in two
adjacent cells can be guaranteed for a larger cell than in GAF.
Simulation result shows that HGAF outperforms GAF in terms of survived nodes and the
packet delivery ratio when the node density is high. The lifetime of dense and randomly
distributed networks with HGAF is about 200% as long as ones with GAF.

Chapter 4
POWER-EFFICIENT GATHERING IN SENSOR
INFORMATION SYSTEM

LITERATURE REVIEW
Simple approach to collect data from sensor nodes is direct approach where each sensor
nodes transmit the data directly to the base station (BS) which is located far away. Cost to
transmit data from each sensor node to BS is very high, thus nodes die quickly and hence
reducing the lifetime of the network. Therefore to utilize energy efficiently goal is to use as
few transmissions as possible. LEACH Protocol is designed where sensor nodes are
organized to form local cluster with one node in cluster selected as cluster head. Sensor nodes
from one cluster send data to its cluster head where data is aggregated and fused data is
transmitted to BS. Cluster heads are chosen randomly and achieve a factor of 8 improvements
compared to direct approach. Although LEACH protocol reduces energy consumption by
factor 8, energy is consumed is forming cluster. In LEACH 5% of the nodes are the head
nodes at the same time that also amounts to energy consumption [12].
PEGASIS (Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information System)
PEGASIS is the improved protocol where only one node is chosen a head node which
sends the fused data to the BS per round. This achieves factor of 2 improvement compared to
LEACH protocol [12]. PEGASIS protocol requires formation of chain which is achieved in
two steps:
Chain construction
To construct the chain we start from the furthest node from the BS and then greedy
approach is used to construct the chain. In figure 4.1, node c0 lies furthest from the base
station, chain construction start from node c0 which connects to node c1, node c1 connects to
node c2, node c2 connects to node c3, and node c3 connects to node c4, node c4 connect to
c5.

Fig.4.1. Graph showing construction of chain in PEGASIS using Greedy approach.

Gathering Data
Leader of each round is selected randomly. Randomly selecting head node also provides
benefit as it is more likely for nodes to die at random locations thus providing robust
network. When a node dies chain is reconstructed to bypass the dead node [13].

Fig.4.2. Describing data fusion at the head node and transmitting it to BS

After the leader is selected it passes token to initiate data gathering process. Passing token
also requires energy consumption but cost of passing token is very small because token size
is very small. In figure 4.2 node c3 is selected as head node for particular round. Node c5
passes the data to c3 along the chain, c0 passes the data to c3 along the chain. c3 receives the
data, fuses all the data it has received and transmit to the base station.
ADVANTAGES OF PEGASIS OVER LEACH

Compare to LEACH transmitting distance for most of the node reduces in PEGASIS.

Messages received by each head node are at most 2 in PEGASIS is less compared to
LEACH.

Experimental results show that PEGASIS provides improvement by factor 2

compared to LEACH protocol for 50m * 50m network and improvement by factor 3
for 100m * 100m Network.

Since each node gets selected once, energy dissipation is balanced among sensor
nodes.

DRAWBACKS OF THE PEGASIS PROTOCOL

When a head node is selected, there is no consideration how far the BS is located
from the head node [14].

When a head node is selected its energy level is not considered.

Since there is only one node head, it may be the bottle neck of the network causing
delay.

Redundant transmission of data as only one head node is selected.

PEGASIS WITH CDMA NODES

In PEGASIS linear chain based scheme, as transmission is sequential average delay per
round is still high thus simultaneous transmission is desired [13]. If the nodes are CDMA
capable, then binary scheme can be used to perform parallel communication to reduce overall
delay. In Chain-based Binary Approach using CDMA, to minimize delay data is combined
using as many as pairs as possible in each level. At the lowest level chain is constructed in
the same way as was done in the PEGASIS. For data gathering round each node each node
transmits the data to its nearest neighbor in given level of hierarchy. Nodes that receive data
at lower level rise at the next level Objective of the dissertation is to propose the enhanced
PEGASIS protocol based on concentric clustering scheme which is used to minimize the
problem of redundant data transmission since one of the nodes in the chain is selected as a
head node regardless of the base station location. The main idea of the concentric clustering
scheme is to consider the location of the base station to enhance its performance and to
prolong the lifetime of the wireless sensor networks.

Chapter 5
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF ENERGY
CONSUMPTION IN PEGASIS

This section describes the performance analysis of energy consumption in PEGASIS.

When 100 nodes transmit the data to head node on the chain in the clustering-based
PEGASIS protocol, the energy consumption in one round with different data bits can be
formulated as follows [14]:
n

n * E elec * k * E amp * [ d ( m -1,m ) 2 ]

m 1

where,
Eelec = per bit energy consumption in the transmitter circuitry
k

= Data bits

Eamp=

Amplifier transmitting energy

In this formula, dij indicates the distance from i node to j node.

Data receive from a neighbor node
When n nodes receive the data from neighbor nodes, the energy consumption in one round
can be formulated as follows [14]:
E=n*Eelec*k
Data aggregation
Let us assume that the energy consumption of the aggregation at one node is Eagg, then an
energy consumption of entire nodes in one round can be defines as follows [14]:
E=n*Eagg
RADIO MODEL
A radio dissipates Eelec=50nJ/bit to run the transmitter or receiver circuitry. For the
transmitter amplifier, Eamp=100nJ/bit/m2. The radios have power control and can expend the
minimum required energy to reach the intended recipients. The radios can be turned off to
avoid receiving unintended transmissions. We also assume an energy loss due to channel
transmission. Thus, to transmit a k bits message a distance d, the radio expends [14]:

ETX (k , d ) Eelec * k + Eamp * k * d 2

and to receive this message the radio expands [14]:
E RX (k ) E elec * k
Transmitter Electronics (ETX-elec)
Receiver Electronics (ERX-elec)

(ETX-elec=ERX-elec=Eelec)
ETX-elec=50 nJ/bit
TABLE I. Variables
Type

Parameter

Value

Transmitter Electronics

Eelec

50Nj

Transmit Amplifier

Eamp

100pJ

Data Bits

500

Energy for aggregation

Eagg

5nJ

EFFECT OF PARAMETERS ON ENERGY CONSUMPTION

The performance is analyzed on MATLAB software by assuming 100 nodes distributed
randomly. The terrain area is taken as 1000m1000m.
It is shown here the performance of energy consumption in one round using PEGASIS
protocol based on clustering scheme with different sets of data bits. Figure 5.1 shows the
relation between number of nodes and energy consumption for different sets of data bits (k).
It is analyzed from the result that with the increase in number of nodes and data bits, energy
consumption increases. So data bits (k) in the message should be kept low so that energy
consumption will not increase with increase in number of nodes and data bits.
Figure 5.2 shows the relation between number of nodes and energy consumption for different
values of Eelec. It is analyzed from the result that with the increase in number of nodes and
Eelec, energy consumption increases. So

Eelec

in the message should be kept low so that energy

consumption will not increase with increase in number of nodes and Eelec.
It is shown in figure 5.3 that energy consumption is independent of transmit amplifier energy.

14

Energy Consumption Vs Number of Nodes

x 10

K=500
K=1000
K=1500
K=2000
K=2500

12

Energy Consumption(nJ)

10

8
20

0
10

30

40

50
60
Number of Nodes

70

80

90

100

Fig.5.1. Number of nodes vs Energy Consumption with different sets of data bits.
6

14

Energy Consumption Vs Number of Nodes

x 10

Eelec=50
Eelec=100
Eelec=150
Eelec=200
Eelec=250

12

Energy Consumption

10

8
20

0
10

30

40

50
60
Number of Nodes

70

80

90

100

Fig.5.2. Number of nodes vs Energy Consumption with different sets of Eelec.

6

2.5

Energy Consumption Vs Number of Nodes

x 10

Eamp=0.5
Eamp=0.1
Eamp=0.15
Eamp=0.2
Eamp=0.25

Energy Consumption

1.5

0.5

0
10

8
20

30

40

50
60
Number of Nodes

70

80

90

100

Fig.5.3. Number of nodes vs Energy consumption with different sets of Eamp.

Figure 5.4 shows that when n nodes receive the data from neighbor nodes increases, the
energy consumption in one round also enhanced. So it is clear that number of nodes receiving
data should be in minimum to reduce the energy consumption.

Energy consumptioninoneround(nJ)

2.5

Energy consumption in one round vs neighbour nodes

x 10

1.5

0.5

5
6
neighbour nodes

10

Fig. 5.4. Energy consumption in one round vs neighbour nodes.

The energy consumption of the aggregation at one node is Eagg. then an energy consumption
of entire nodes in one round increases when nodes which aggregating data increases. So it is
clear from figure 5.5 that number of nodes aggregating data should be kept minimum to
reduce the energy consumption.
Energy consumption vs nodes aggregating data
50

Energy consumption in one round(nJ)

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5

4
5
6
7
nodes aggregating data

10

Fig.5.5. Energy consumption vs nodes aggregating data

Chapter 6
DESIGN AND SIMULATION FOR CONCENTRIC
CLUSTER BASED PEGASIS

Concentric cluster based PEGASIS is an advance version of PEGASIS protocol. It this

protocol, the shape of a cluster is concentric circles when the sensor networks are divided into
several clusters. When the PEGASIS protocol construct the chain, wireless sensor networks
are divided into several numbers of the concentric shaped clusters to give the flow of the data
transmission. The enhanced PEGASIS protocol consists of following processes as shown in
figure 6.1.
LEVEL ASSIGNMENT
In each level area, the chain construction is started at the farthest node from the base
station using the greedy algorithm. This process of the chain construction is the same with the
current PEGASIS protocol. In the enhanced PEASIS protocol, the high level means that the
node is located at the farther distance from the base station.
Each node in the sensor networks is assigned its own level from the base station. The level is
given as the form like a concentric circle using the signal strength. The interval of level may
be various according to setting values in the base station. Additionally, the number of these
levels is depended on various parameters such as the density of the sensor networks, the
number of nodes, or the location of the base station.

Fig.6.1. Level assignment and Chain construction

CHAIN CONSTRUCTION IN THE LEVEL AREA

In each level area, the chain construction is started at the farthest node from the base
station using the greedy algorithm. This process of the chain construction is the same with the
current PEGASIS protocol. In the enhanced PEASIS protocol, the high level means that the
node is located at the farther distance from the base station.
SIMULATION SCENARIO AND RESULTS
The clustering-scheme PEGASIS was implemented on MATLAB software. In concentric
clustering scheme network in is divided in the form of concentric shaped clusters. The
sensors are randomly deployed in region; all nodes form a data chain with a special
algorithm. In figure 6.2, there are 180 nodes distributed randomly. The base station is located
at the origin. The terrain area is taken as 1000m1000m. Node id is provided to each node as
shown in figure which is used to calculate distance from one node to every other node.
Neighbor of each node is also calculated within 100 meter range with the help of id provided
to nodes.

1000

118

6537 20
178
135 128 143
76
13610
171
82
59
900
157
4
44 139
34
30
39
7
77 147 9652
17
42
54116160 177 108 9
133 75
800 159
103
158
129 13070 74 80 141
45
101
3
700 92
106
127
63
46109 161
149
117
112
38
95
89
64
36
132 79
84
91 15
164
69
155
600 124 99
137
175 26
172
179
126
115 83
100
154
145
122
86
165 66
140
102
500
152
53104
110
174
170
55
56
2 29
57
21
153
131
43
98
51
142
7358
94
169
400
67
93
25
90
71
97
78
24
113
121
151
22
88
148 47
173
23
300
61
146
163
5
168
32
123
6
138
35
12
85
8
11
200 162
68
81
50
16105
18
1948
176
33
49
114
41
1
27
111
156
100
167
134
14
144
120
166
150
13
125
62
180 28 40
72
60
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900 1000
31

87

107
119

Fig.6.2. Creation of nodes

Neighbor of each node within 100 meter range is calculated in figure 6.3 for example. 119 is a
neighbor of 107, 31 and 171 are the neighbor nodes of 118. Chain construction is performed with the
help of these neighbor nodes.

1000

118

6537 20
178
135 128 143
76
13610
171
82
59
900
157
4
44 139
34
30
39
7
77 147 9652
17
42
54116160 177 108 9
133 75
800 159
103
158
129 13070 74 80 141
45
101
3
700 92
106
127
63
46109 161
149
117
112
38
95
89
64
36
15
132
84
91 164
69
79
600 155
137
124 99
175 26
172
179
126
115 83
100
154
145
66
122
86
165
140
102
500
152
53104
110 170
174
55
56
2 29
57
21
153
131
43
98
51
142
7358
94
169
400
67
93
25
90
71
97
78
24
113
121
151
22
88
148 47
173
23
300
61
146
163
5
168
32
123
6 12
138
35
85
8
11
200 162
68
81
50
16105
18
19
48
176
33
49
114
41
1
27
111
156
100
167
134
14
144
120
166
150
13
125
62
180 28 40
72
60
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900 1000
31

87

107
119

Fig.6.3. Neighbor of each node within 100 meter range

In figure 6.4, each node in the sensor networks is assigned its own level from the base station.
The interval of level may be various according to setting values in the base station. The
number of these levels depends on the location of the base station.
1000

118

6537 20
178
135 128 143
76
13610
171
82
59
900
157
4
44 139
34
30
39
7
77 147 9652
17
42
54116160 177 108 9
133 75
800 159
103
158
129 13070 74 80 141
45
101
3
700 92
106
127
63
46109 161
149
117
112
38
95
89
64
36
15
132 79
84
91 164
69
600 155
137
124 99
175 26
172
179
126
83
115
100
154
145
122
86
165 66
140
102
500
152
53104
110 170
174
55
56
2 29
57
21
153
131
43
98
51
142
7358
94
169
400
67
93
25
90
71
97
78
24
113
121
151
47
22
88
148
173
23
300
61
146
163
5
168
32
123
6
138
35
12
85
8
11
200 162
68
81
50
16105
18
1948
176
33
49
114
41
1
27
111
156
100
167
134
14
144
120
166
150
13
125
62
180 28 40
72
60
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900 1000
31

87

107
119

Fig.6.4. Level Assignment

In each level area, the chain construction is started at the farthest node from the base station
using the greedy algorithm as shown in Figure 6.6. In each level, farthest node from the base
station finds the closest neighbor of it in same level and start the process of chain
construction. Figure 6.5 shows the neighbor nodes at different level assignment. This process
of the chain construction is the same with the current PEGASIS protocol.

1000

118

6537 20
178
135 128 143
76
171
82
59
900
157
34
30
39
77 147 9652
17
42
54116160 177 108 9
133 75
800 159
103
158
129 13070 74 80 141
45
101
3
700 92
106
127
63
46109 161
149
117
112
38
95
89
64
36
15
132 79
84
91 164
69
600 155
137
124 99
175 26
172
179
126
83
115
100
154
145
122
86
165 66
140
102
500
152
53104
110 170
174
55
56
2 29
57
21
153
131
43
98
51
142
7358
94
169
400
67
93
25
90
71
97
78
24
113
121
151
22
88
148 47
173
23
300
61
146
163
5
168
32
123
6
138
35
12
85
8
11
200 162
68
81
50
16105
18
1948
176
33
49
114
41
1
27
111
156
100
167
134
14
144
120
166
150
125
6213
28
180
72
40
60
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900 1000
31

87

107
119

13610
4
44 139
7

Fig.6.5. Neighbor of each node at different level assignment

1000

118

6537 20
178
135 128 143
76
13610
171
82
59
900
157
4
44 139
34
30
39
7
147
52
77
17
96
42
54116160 177 108 9
133 75
800 159
103
158
129 13070 74 80 141
45
101
3
700 92
106
127
63
46109 161
149
117 89
112
38
95
64
36
15
132 79
84
91 164
69
600 155
137
124 99
175 26
172
179
126
83
115
100
154
145
122
86
165 66
140
102
500
152
53104
110 170
174
55
56
2 29
57
21
153
131
43
98
51
142
7358
94
169
400
67
93
25
90
71
97
78
24
113
121
151
47
22
88
148
173
23
300
61
146
163
5
168
32
123
6
138
35
12
85
8
11
200 162
68
81
50
16105
18
1948
176
33
49
114
41
1
27
111
156
100
167
134
14
144
120
166
150
125
6213
28
180
72
40
60
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900 1000
31

87

107
119

Fig.6.6.Chain Construction

Chapter 7
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

The results indicate that when number of nodes, energy consumption per bit and number
of data bits increases, energy consumption increases. So, all these parameters should be kept
low to minimize energy consumption. It is also analyzed that nodes aggregating data and
neighbor nodes receiving data should be kept low so that energy consumption does not
increase. In this work, nodes are created and neighbor of each node is assigned at each level
and chain construction of node is done in each level area.
In future, the residual energy of all nodes will be calculated so that the node with the
highest level will be selected as a head node and data will be accumulated towards it. A new
method will be chosen for selecting the node as a head node to observe the energy
consumption compared to existing PEGASIS. In addition to this, I would like to add 10 back
up nodes in the task so that when the existing head node going to die out it will transfer all its
work load of transferring data to the next node in the queue.

REFERENCES

[1]

S.Prasanna and Srinivasa Rao, An Overview of Wireless Sensor Networks

Applications and Security, International Journal of Soft Computing and
Engineering (IJSCE) ISSN: 2231-2307, Volume-2, Issue-2, May 2012.

[2]

G. H. Raghunandan and B.N. Lakshmi, A Comparative Analysis of Routing

Techniques for Wireless Sensor Networks, Proceedings of the National
Conference on Innovations in Emerging Technology, pp.17-22, 2011.

[3]

D. Bhattacharyya and T. Kim, S. Pal, A Comparative Study of Wireless Sensor

Networks and Their Routing Protocols, MDPI Journal on Sensor, vol. 10, pp.
10506-10523, 2010.

[4]

Joanna Kulik, Hari Balakrishnan and W. R. Heinzelman, (1999) Adaptive

Protocols for Information Dissemination in Wireless Sensor Networks,
Proceedings on the 5th annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Mobile
computing and networking, pp. 174-185.

[5]

Abdul Gani Khan, A Comparative Analysis: Routing Protocols For Wireless

Sensor Networks, International Journal of Research in IT & Management,
Volume 2, Issue 2 February 2012

[6]

K. E. Kannammal and

K. E. Kannammal, New Interest Propagation

Mechanism in Directed Diffusion Protocol for Mobile Sensor Networks,

European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X, Vol.68, No.1, pp.
36-42, 2012.
[7]

R. Vidhyapriya, Energy Aware Routing for Wireless Sensor Networks,

Signal Processing, Communication and Networking, pp. 545-550, Feb. 2007.

[8]

Konrad Iwanicki and Maarten Van Steen, On Hierarchical Routing in Wireless

Sensor Networks, in Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on
Information Processing in Sensor Networks, pp. 133-144.

[9]

Nazia Majadi, U-LEACH: A Routing Protocol for Prolonging Lifetime of

Wireless Sensor Networks, International Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 2, Issue4, July-August 2012,
pp.1649-1652

[10] V.Chandrasekaran, Dr.A.Shanmugam, A Review On Hierarchical Cluster

Based Routing In Wireless Sensor Networks, Journal of Global Research in
Computer Science (JGRCS), Volume 3, No. 2, February2012

[11] Tokuya Inagaki and Susumu Ishihara, HGAF: A power saving scheme for
wireless sensor network, Journal of Information Processing, vol. 17, pp. 255266, Oct. 2009.
[12] Stephanie Lindsey, Cauligi S. Raghvendra, PEGASIS: Power-Efficient
Gathering in Sensor Information System, Aerospace Conference Proceedings,
2002. IEEE, Vol.3, pp. 3-1125- 3-113.
[13] Stephanie Lindsey, Cauligi Raghavendra and Krishna Sivalingam, Data
Gathering in Sensor Networks using Energy Delay Metric, Proceedings of the
15th International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium, pp. 188,
2001.
[14] Vrinda Gupta and Rajoo Pandey, Investigating Clustering Algorithms in
Microsensor

Networks

Proceedings

of

the

World

Engineering,Vol II WCE, July 4 - 6, 2012, London, U.K.

Congress

on

ACCEPTED AND PUBLISHED RESEARCH PAPERS

[1] Neha Rathi, Jyoti Saraswat and Partha Pratim Bhattacharya, ' A Review On
Routing Protocols For Application In Wireless Sensor Networks', International
Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS) Vol.3, No.5, September
2012 , pp : 39-58.
[2] Jyoti Saraswat, Neha Rathi and Pratha Pratim Bhattacharya,Techniques to
Enhance the Lifetime of Wireless Sensor Networks in Global Journal of
Computer Science and Technology, Volume 12, Issue 14, Version 1.0, Year
2012, Type: Double Blind Peer Reviewed International Research Journal,
Publisher: Global Journals Inc. (USA), Online ISSN: 0975-4172 & Print ISSN:
0975-4350.
[3]

Neha Rathi, Kaushik Ghosh and Partha Pratim Bhattacharya, Performance

Analysis of Concentric Cluster Based PEGASIS for Wireless Sensor Networks ,
Paper accepted in MECON-2013, sponsored by URSI (International Union of
Radio Science) and IEEE.