DEEC and EDEEC Routing Protocols for Heterogeneous Wireless Sensor Networks: A Brief Comparative Study

Redjimi, Kenza; Boulaiche, Mehdi; Redjimi, Mohammed

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-98531-8_12

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Results achieved longer lifetime and stability period. Next, heterogeneous WSN routing protocols DEEC and enhanced distributed energy efficient clustering (EDEEC) were compared in [9] and the results showed that the EDEEC protocol provided better performance values than DEEC. The concept of a green wireless sensor network is the latest trend in the area of WSN.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lifetime enhanced energy efficient wireless sensor networks using renewable energy

Tagare

Narendra

2023

IJECE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we consider a remote environment with randomly deployed sensor nodes, with an initial energy of E0 (J) and a solar panel. A hierarchical clustering technique is implemented. At each round, the normal nodes send the sensed data to the nearest cluster head (CH) which is chosen on the probability value. Data after aggregation at CHs is sent to the base station (BS). CH requires more energy than normal nodes. Here, we energize only CHs if their energy is less than 5% of its initial value with the use of solar energy. We evaluate parameters like energy consumption, the lifetime of the network, and data packets sent to CH and BS. The obtained results are compared with existing techniques. The proposed protocol provides better energy efficiency and network lifetime. The results show increased stability with delayed death of the first node. The network lifetime of the proposed protocol is compared to the multi-level hybrid energy efficient distributed (MLHEED) technique and low-energy adaptive clustering hierarchy (LEACH) variants. Network lifetime is enhanced by 13.35%. Energy consumption is reduced with respect to MLHEED-4, 5, and 6 by 7.15%, 12.10%, and 14.975% respectively. The no. of packets transferred to the BS is greater than the MLHEED protocol by 39.03%.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%