1. International Journal of Computer Engineering and Technology (IJCET), ISSN 0976-
6367(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6375(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March – April (2013), © IAEME
396
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF VARIOUS ROUTING
TECHNIQUES IN WIRELESS MULTIMEDIA SENSOR NETWORKS
Rahul R. Singh1
, Richa K. Makhijani2
1
(Department of CSE, SSGBCOET, Bhusawal, INDIA)
2
(Department of CSE, SSGBCOET, Bhusawal, INDIA)
ABSTRACT
Wireless Multimedia Sensor Networks (WMSNs) is simply a wireless sensor network
supporting multimedia traffic by deployment of data sensors and multimedia sensors as the
nodes. The network need to support the issues that multimedia traffic brings to the sensor
networks, e.g. QoS, energy, MAC layer, bandwidth, throughput, packet delivery rate etc.
When it is concerned to sensor network the energy required to transmit data is much higher
compared to simple wireless network. Wireless Sensor Networks are uniquely characterized
by properties like limited power they can harvest or store, dynamic network topology, large
scale of deployment. Hierarchical clustering is one of the possible solutions to save energy of
wireless multimedia sensor nodes. We propose a technique RALEACH for routing in
WMSN.
Keywords: Energy efficient, Wireless Multimedia Sensor Network, Hierarchical clustering,
bandwidth, throughput, packet delivery rate, Cluster Head (CH).
1. INTRODUCTION
Wireless Multimedia Sensor Networks (WMSNs) in recent days is getting more and
more attention due to its potential applications [6]. The fast advancement in the technology
field of wireless multimedia sensor networks helps in different area to get the accurate data.
The sensors are capable of producing a measurable response to a change in any physical
condition like temperature, magnetic field and light. The sensor nodes can process the
gathered information, transmit the acquired message to the sink node and communicate with
each other. These sensor devices are battery-operated, with low power and limited storage
capacity [1]. Hence, increasing the lifetime of the network an efficient energy management
plays a very critical role.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ENGINEERING
& TECHNOLOGY (IJCET)
ISSN 0976 – 6367(Print)
ISSN 0976 – 6375(Online)
Volume 4, Issue 2, March – April (2013), pp. 396-402
© IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijcet.asp
Journal Impact Factor (2013): 6.1302 (Calculated by GISI)
www.jifactor.com
IJCET
© I A E M E

2. International Journal of Computer Engineering and Technology (IJCET), ISSN 0976-
6367(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6375(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March – April (2013), © IAEME
397
A wireless multimedia sensor network system has three parts that includes sensor
nodes, sink node and management node. 70% of energy consumption is caused during data
transmission process at sensor nodes. LEACH Protocol is the first protocol of hierarchical
routings which proposed data fusion, low energy utilization, lifetime and throughput; it is of
milestone significance in clustering routing protocols. Many hierarchical routing protocols
are improved, based on LEACH protocol.
2. RELATED WORK
When any wireless network is being designed for the communication, the first thing is
to look for establishing data transmission route with less noise ratio. But in case of wireless
multimedia sensor networks the objective constraint is to design route in such a way that data
been transmitted with less energy consumption to the sink. Now-a-days many research have
been carried out by many researcher [2][3][4][6][7][9][10]. Basically there are three
techniques used for routing in WMSN, which are:
• Flat Routing: each node plays the same role and sensor nodes collaborate to perform the
sensing task.
• Hierarchical (Cluster-based) Routing: higher-energy nodes are used to process and send
the information, while low-energy nodes are used to perform the sensing in the proximity of
the target. The creation of clusters and assigning special tasks to cluster heads can greatly
contribute to overall system scalability, lifetime, and energy efficiency. Hierarchical routing
is an efficient way to lower energy consumption within a cluster, performing data aggregation
and fusion in order to decrease the number of transmitted messages to the sink node.
• Location-based: sensor nodes are addressed by means of their locations. The distance
between neighboring nodes can be estimated on the basis of incoming signal strengths.
Relative coordinates of neighboring nodes can be obtained by exchanging such information
between neighbors or by communicating with a satellite using GPS. To save energy, some
location-based schemes demand that nodes should go to sleep if there is no activity.
2.1. LEACH
Leach algorithm increases lifetime of the WSN by randomly rotating role of a CH
among all the nodes. In Leach, a node selects a random number between 0 and 1. If the
selected random number is less than the threshold value T(n), then node declares itself as a
CH for the current round. Threshold value T(n) is given by equation 1. LEACH ensures that
each node becomes a cluster head only once in 1/p rounds, where p is a desired percentage of
CH during each round. Leach does not consider the current state (energy level) of a node
while electing it as a CH [9].
ܶሺ݊ሻ ൌ ൝
௣
ଵି௣‫כ‬ሺ௥ ௠௢ௗ
భ
೛
ሻ
݂݅ ݊ ‫א‬ ‫ܩ‬
0 ‫݁ݏ݅ݓݎ݄݁ݐ݋‬
(1)
Where p is the portion of the nodes becoming the cluster-heads and r is the number of
current round.
ALEACH is distributed energy efficient routing protocol which considers energy level of
a node while electing CHs. Like LEACH, ALEACH also works in rounds. Each round begins
with Cluster Setup phase. During cluster setup phase a node will select a random number

3. International Journal of Computer Engineering and Technology (IJCET), ISSN 0976-
6367(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6375(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March – April (2013), © IAEME
398
between 0 and 1. If selected random number is less than threshold value T(n) then node will
declare itself as a cluster head where T(n) is given by equation 2.
ܶሺ݊ሻ ൌ ‫ܩ‬௣ ൅ ‫ܵܥ‬௣ (2)
Where Gp and CSp is given by equations 3 and 4 respectively. Gp and CSp refer to
general probability and current state probability.
‫ܩ‬௣ ൌ
௞
ேି௞ሺ௥ ௠௢ௗ
ಿ
ೖ
ሻ
(3)
Where k/N refers to the desired percentage of cluster heads during each round and
Ecurrent and Emax is remaining energy and maximum energy of a node respectively.
‫ܵܥ‬௣ ൌ
ா೎ೠೝೝ೐೙೟
ா೘ೌೌೣ
ൈ
௞
ே
(4)
ALeach has considered energy level of a node to decide a node will become a CH during
a particular round or not. Major drawback of ALeach is proper importance (weights) is not
given to general probability and current state probability [6].
2.2. WALEACH
WALeach divides rounds into cluster set up phase and steady setup phase. Cluster
setup phase is used to elect cluster heads. During cluster setup phase each node selects a
random number between 0 and 1. If selected number is less than threshold value T(n), a node
elects itself as a cluster head for the current round, where T(n) is given by equation 2. The
general probability and current state probability is given by equation 5 and equation 6
respectively. In these equations w is used to assign weight to general probability and current
state probability [5].
‫ܩ‬௣ ൌ
ேିሺ௪‫כ‬௞ሻ
ே
ൈ
௞
ேି௞‫כ‬ሺ௥ ௠௢ௗ
ಿ
ೖ
ሻ
(5)
‫ܵܥ‬௣ ൌ
௪‫כ‬௞
ே
ൈ
ா೎ೠೝೝ೐೙೟
ா೘ೌೣ
(6)
3. PROPOSED METHODOLOGY
We proposed a variant of LEACH, named RALEACH (Ratio based Advanced
LEACH) which decides a threshold value based on the square root of ratio of current packet
length and control packet length along with Gp & CSp.
This change results into significant improvement in network lifetime. Along with this, there
is an increase in data traffic sent, death of first node occurrence, total number of rounds and
residual energy consumption. The results have been emulated at MATLAB and the
comparison with existing techniques is provided, through simulation.
The Election of Cluster Heads is given by equation 7.
ሺ‫ܩ‬௣ ൅ ‫ܵܥ‬௣ሻ ൈ ට
௉௔௖௞௘௧௅௘௡௚௧௛
௖௥௧௉௔௖௞௘௧௅௘௡௚௧௛
(7)

4. International Journal of Computer Engineering and Technology (IJCET), ISSN 0976-
6367(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6375(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March – April (2013), © IAEME
399
The sensor network model is having the following properties as shown in Fig-1.
Figure-1: Deployments of nodes.
a) The nodes are randomly distributed in 100m by 100m area.
b) The sink is placed at the centre of network with unlimited energy.
c) The Nodes & CH with limited energy.
d) The nodes are ones generated is fixed till they die.
e) CH gets modified or changed when old dies.
f) All Nodes are same in nature. Nodes send data to CH & CH forward data to sink.
g) Sink broadcast the routes to CH & Nodes in the network.
h) Each CH directly communicates with BS no matter the distance between CH and
BS. It will consume lot of its energy if the distance is far.
4. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
To evaluate the performance of RALEACH, we consider a 100 X 100 network
configuration with 101 nodes, where each sensor node is assigned an initial energy of 0.5 J,
the amount of transmission energy is 50 nJ /bit , transmit amplifier energy (Emp) is
0.0013pJ/bit/m4.
The criteria for performance evaluation are the network lifetime, the energy
consumption and data aggregated at sink and no. of nodes alive. Each performance criteria is
evaluated by varying the packet size to be transmitted from nodes. We tracked the rate at
which the data are transferred to the sink and the amount of energy required to get the data to
the sink.
The comparison of performance for the energy utilized by nodes is shown in the
following graphs:
Fig. 3 & fig. 4 shows amount of energy utilization and lifetime of the network of each
technique. Here initially all nodes are with 0.5J of energy as the rounds of packet sending
starts the energy goes on decreasing. The lifetime of the network remains even if the energy
level is 0J. The Leach lifetime is very less compared to RALEACH and energy requirement
is less to transmit data in RALEACH as compared to others.

5. International Journal of Computer Engineering and Technology (IJCET), ISSN 0976-
6367(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6375(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March – April (2013), © IAEME
400
In LEACH, the first node dies after 505 rounds; in ALEACH, the first node dies after
488 rounds; in WALEACH, the first node dies after 471 rounds; in RALEACH, the first node
dies after 1107 rounds. This shows that there is a significant improvement in the lifetime of a
node shown in fig. 5.
Fig. 6 shows the graph of total number of round within the lifetime of a network –
LEACH completes 1110 rounds, ALEACH completes 913 rounds, WALEACH completes
1436 rounds, RALEACH completes 2642 rounds.
Table-1: Simulation Parameters
Parameter Value
Node
Deployment
Area
100m x 100m
Number of
Nodes
100
Initial Energy 0.5 Joules
Size of Data
messages
64000 bytes, 6400
bytes & 640 bytes
Size of Control
Packets
200 Bytes
Expected
percentage of
CH per round
5%
Important Ratio
Factor ඨ
ܲܽܿ݇݁‫݄ݐ݃݊݁ܮݐ‬
ܿ‫݄ݐ݃݊݁ܮݐ݁݇ܿܽܲݐݎ‬
CH proportion p=5%
Sink location (50,50)
Eelec = Etx=Erx 50nJ/bit
EDA 5nJ/bit
‫א‬fs 10pJ/bit/m2
‫א‬mp 0.0013pJ/bit/m4
Figure-2: Flowchart of WMSN
Fig. 7 shows the graph of average number of CH formation per round – in the
LEACH network the average number of Cluster Head per round is 2.791, in the ALEACH
network the average number of Cluster Head per round is 3.436, in the WALEACH network
the average number of Cluster Head per round is 2.409, in the RALEACH network the
average number of Cluster Head per round is 3.029.

6. International Journal of Computer Engineering and Technology (IJCET), ISSN 0976-
6367(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6375(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March – April (2013), © IAEME
401
Fig. 8 shows the graph total numbers of packets sent to sink – in LEACH the numbers
of packets sent to sink are 3098 of size 6400bytes, in ALEACH the numbers of packets sent
to sink are 3137 of size 6400bytes, in WALEACH the numbers of packets sent to sink are
3460 of size 6400bytes, in RALEACH the numbers of packets send to sink are 8002 of size
6400bytes.

7. International Journal of Computer Engineering and Technology (IJCET), ISSN 0976-
6367(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6375(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March – April (2013), © IAEME
402
5. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
The main concern of this work is to examine the energy efficiency and performance
evaluation of LEACH protocol and its modified variants. The parameters of comparison of
WMSN network are total lifetime, data delivery and energy utilization which are shown in
the simulation results. From this work it is found that RALEACH provides better results for
data transmission and low energy requirement. This paper has covered performance of
LEACH protocol and its modified variants, we can also compare this protocol with other
routing protocols that may or may not be hierarchical in nature in future. It is needed to
satisfy the constraints introduced by factors such as fault tolerance, topology change, cost,
environment, scalability, and power consumption for realization of sensor networks which is
not concern in this work. Since these constraints are highly specific and stringent for sensor
networks, these factors can be explored in future.
REFERENCES
[1] Kai Lin & Min Chen, Reliable Routing Based on Energy Prediction for Wireless
Multimedia Sensor Networks, IEEE Globecom 2010 proceedings.
[2] Laiali Almazaydeh, Eman Abdelfattah, Manal Al- Bzoor and Amer Al- Rahayfeh,
Performance Evaluation of Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks, IJCSIT,
Volume 2, Number 2, April 2010.
[3] Rohan G. Chaudhari, Dr. Dharmistha D. Vishwakarma & Pranav B. Lapsiwala, Energy
Efficient LEACH Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks, IJARCSEE, Volume 2, Issue
1, January 2013.
[4] Sawroop Kaur, Deepak Prashar & Rita Rani, Improvement in Energy Efficiency of
Wireless Sensor Network, IJCT, Volume 2 No.2, April 2012.
[5] Prof Ankit Thakkar and Dr K Kotecha, WALEACH: weight based energy efficient
advanced leach algorithm, CS & IT-CSCP 2012.
[6] Samina Ehsan and Bechir Hamdaoui, A Survey on Energy-Efficient Routing
Techniques with QoS Assurances for Wireless Multimedia Sensor Networks, IEEE
Communications Surveys & Tutorials, Vol. 14, No. 2, Second Quarter 2012.
[7] Ian F. Akyildiz, Tommaso Melodia & Kaushik R. Chowdury, Wireless Multimedia
Sensor Networks: A Survey, IEEE Wireless Communications, December 2007.
[8] Jamal N. Al-Karaki & Ahmed E. Kamal, Routing Techniques in Wireless Sensor
Networks: A Survey, ICUBE initiative of Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011.
[9] Ezzati Abdellah, Said Benalla, Abderrahim Beni Hssane & Moulay Lahcen Hasnaoui,
Advanced Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy, IJCSE, Vol. 02, No. 07, 2010.
[10] B.A.Sabarish & R.Lavanya, Modified Leach Protocol for Wireless Sensor Network,
IJCA (0975 – 8887), Volume 62– No.3, January 2013.
[11] Ms. Meghana. N.Ingole, Mrs.M.S.Bewoor and Mr.S.H.Patil, “Context Sensitive Text
Summarization using Hierarchical Clustering Algorithm”, International journal of
Computer Engineering & Technology (IJCET), Volume 3, Issue 1, 2012, pp. 322 - 329,
ISSN Print: 0976 – 6367, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6375.
[12] Poonam Thakur and M.Vijaya Raju, “Survey on Routing Techniques for Manets and
Wireless Sensor Networks: A Comparison”, International journal of Computer
Engineering & Technology (IJCET), Volume 4, Issue 1, 2013, pp. 275 - 283,
ISSN Print: 0976 – 6367, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6375.