Mitigating energy hole problem with power control in heterogeneous sensor networks

Khanmirza, Hamed

doi:10.1109/iraniancee.2017.7985136

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, management of the structure has depending to a single sensor node. The last two cases are disadvantages of star structure [11]. In the mesh structure, the sensor nodes can communicate together when they are within radio range of each other.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, energy issue is a problem and disadvantage of the model. Moreover, the number of hops and packet delay time increases [11]. Hybrid model is between the star and the mesh structures that provide a robust and selfaround communications network.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hybrid model is between the star and the mesh structures that provide a robust and selfaround communications network. In this model, the sensor nodes with minimum energy are not send message to other nodes and allow to them to saving energy [11]. In Section 2 is discussed the related works about energy efficiency in wireless sensor networks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Efficient Resource Consumption by Dynamic Clustering and Optimized Routes in Wireless Sensor Networks

Kiani¹

2018

ijacsa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-The energy issue is an important parameter in the wireless sensor networks and should be managed in the different applications. We propose a new routing algorithm that it is energy efficient and uses different approaches as dynamic clustering, spanning tree, self-configurable routing and controls energy consuming by data-driven and power management schemas. It has two main phases. The first is consisting of the steady cluster, cluster head election and creation-spanning tree in each cluster and the second phase is data transmission. The proposed protocol is compared with four other protocols in network lifetime, network balance, and average packet delay and packet delivery. Simulation results show the proposed protocol performance in the network lifetime is about 6 per cent higher than Improved-LEACH, 21.5 per cent higher than EESR and 5.8 per cent higher than DHCO. Its improvement in packet delivery parameter is about 3.5 per cent higher than Improved-LEACH, 6.5 per cent higher than EESR and 3 per cent higher than DHCO. In addition, the performance or in packet delay is about 17 per cent higher than EESR and 6 per cent higher than DHCO but Improved-LEACH protocol has a good performance than our protocol about 4 per cent.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation