International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
ISSN 2319 - 4847
Design Issues for Routing Protocols in WSNs
Based on Classification
1
Neha Mehndiratta, 2Manju, 3Harish Bedi
1
M.Tech (Student), 2,3Assistant Professor
Computer Science Department, MDU Rohtak
BRCM College of Engineering & Technology Bahal (Hry) 127028, India
2
Faculty of Engineering & Technology
Mody Institute of Technology & Science Lakshmangarh (Rajasthan), 332311, India
1,3
ABSTRACT
Wireless sensor network (WSN) has emerged as a useful supplement to the modern wireless communication networks. Recent
advances in wireless sensor networks have led to many new protocols specifically designed for sensor networks where energy
awareness is an essential consideration. In WSN, the sensor nodes have a limited transmission range, their processing and
storage capabilities as well as their energy resources are also limited. Routing protocols for wireless sensor networks are
responsible for maintaining the routes in the network and have to ensure reliable multi-hop communication under these
conditions. In this paper we discuss design issues related to routing protocols for sensor networks and present a classification
for the various approaches pursued.
Keywords: Wireless Sensor Networks, Routing Protocols, Design Issues, Applications.
1. INTRODUCTION
Wireless sensor network (WSN) is widely considered as one of the important technologies to monitor and control the
physical environment from remote locations. Such networks can greatly improve the accuracy of information obtained
via collaboration among sensor nodes and online information processing at those nodes.
Wireless sensor networks improve sensing accuracy by providing distributed processing of vast quantities of sensing
information (e.g., sensing data, acoustic data, high-resolution images, etc.). When networked, sensors can aggregate
such data to provide a rich, multi-dimensional view of the environment [1].
A sensor network [2] [3] is a network of many tiny disposable low power devices, called nodes, which are spatially
distributed in order to perform an application-oriented global task. These nodes form a network by communicating with
each other either directly or through other nodes. One or more nodes among them will serve as sink(s) that are capable
of communicating with the user either directly or through the existing wired networks. The primary component of the
network is the sensor, essential for monitoring real world physical conditions such as sound, temperature, humidity,
intensity, vibration, pressure, motion, pollutants etc. at different locations. The tiny sensor nodes, which consist of
sensing, on board processor for data processing, and communicating components, leverage the idea of sensor networks
based on collaborative effort of a large number of nodes [4]. Fig. 1 shows the structural view of a sensor network in
which sensor nodes are shown as small circles. Each node typically consists of the four components: sensor unit, central
processing unit (CPU), power unit, and communication unit. They are assigned with different tasks. The sensor unit
consists of sensor and ADC (Analog to Digital Converter). The sensor unit is responsible for collecting information as
the ADC requests, and returning the analog data it sensed. ADC is a translator that tells the CPU what the sensor unit
has sensed, and also informs the sensor unit what to do. Communication unit is tasked to receive command or query
from and transmit the data from CPU to the outside world. CPU is the most complex unit. It interprets the command or
query to ADC, monitors and controls power if necessary, processes received data, computes the next hop to the sink,
etc. Power unit supplies power to sensor unit, processing unit and communication unit. Each node may also consist of
the two optional components namely Location finding system and Mobilizer. If the user requires the knowledge of
location with high accuracy then the node should pusses Location finding system and Mobilizer may be needed to move
sensor nodes when it is required to carry out the assigned tasks.
Instead of sending the raw data to the nodes responsible for the fusion, sensor nodes use their processing abilities to
locally carry out simple computations and transmit only the required and partially processed data. The sensor nodes not
only collect useful information such as sound, temperature, light etc., they also play a role of the router by
communicating through wireless channels under battery-constraints [3]. Sensor network nodes are limited with respect
to energy supply, restricted computational capacity and communication bandwidth. The ideal wireless sensor is
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
Page 312
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
ISSN 2319 - 4847
networked and scalable, fault tolerance, consume very little power, smart and software programmable, efficient, capable
of fast data acquisition, reliable and accurate over long term, cost little to purchase and required no real maintenance.
The basic goals of a WSN are to: (i) determine the value of physical variables at a given location, (ii) detect the
occurrence of events of interest, and estimate parameters of the detected event or events, (iii) classify a detected object,
and (iv) track an object. Thus, the important requirements of a WSN are: (i) use of a large number of sensors, (ii)
attachment of stationary sensors, (iii) low energy consumption, (iv)self organization capability, (v) collaborative signal
processing, and (vi) querying ability.
Fig. 1: Structural view of sensor network
2. RELATED WORK
The growing interest in wireless sensor networks and the continual emergence of new architectural techniques inspired
some previous efforts for surveying the characteristics, applications and communication protocols for such a technical
area [2] [5]. In this subsection we highlight the features that distinguish our survey and hint the difference in scope.
The goal of [2] is classification and comparison of routing protocols in WSNs. Comparison of MANETS (Mobile
Ad-hoc Networks) and Sensor networks is done as these are two classes of wireless Ad-hoc networks with resource
constraints. Possible applications of sensor networks are also discussed. That survey is a good introductory for readers
interested in the broad area. Although a number of routing protocols for sensor networks are covered, the paper does
not description for such routing protocols and the list of discussed protocols is not meant to be complete given the scope
of the survey. Our survey is more focused and can serve those who like deeper insight for routing issues and techniques
in wireless sensor networks.
Taxonomy of different routing techniques of wireless sensor networks is developed in [5]. This work gives a high
level description of routing techniques. Routing protocols are classified by considering network structure and protocol
operation. Such classification is helpful for a designer to select the appropriate infrastructure for his/her application.
Our work is a dedicated study of the network layer, describing and categorizing the different approaches for data
routing. In addition, we summarize different architectural design issues that may affect the performance of routing
protocols.
3. APPLICATIONS OF SENSOR NETWORKS
In the recent past, wireless sensor networks have found their way into a wide variety of applications and systems with
vastly varying requirements and characteristics [6] [7].
The sensor networks can be used in Disaster Relief, Emergency Rescue operation, Military, Habitat Monitoring, Health
Care, Environmental monitoring, Home networks, detecting chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive
material etc. as summarized in Table 1.
Table 1: Some applications for different areas
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
Page 313
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
ISSN 2319 - 4847
Area
Military
Emergency situations
Physical world
Medical and health
Industrial
Home networks
Automotive
Applications
Military situation awareness [6]
Sensing intruders on basis
Detection of enemy unit movements an land and sea[8]
Disaster management. Fire/water detectors
Hazardous chemical level and fires[8]
Environmental monitoring of water and soil [9]
Habitual monitoring [9]
Observation of biological and artificial systems [9]
Sensors for blood flow, respiratory rate, ECG(electrocardiogram), pulse
oxy-meter, blood pressure and oxygen measurement [10]. Monitoring
people’s location and health condition
Factory process control and industrial automation [6]
Monitoring and control of industrial equipment
Home appliances, location awareness (Bluetooth)
Person locator
Tire pressure monitoring Active mobility
Coordinated vehicle tracking [6]
4. ROUTING CHALLENGES AND DESIGN ISSUES IN WSNS
Despite the innumerable applications of WSNs, these networks have several restrictions, e.g., limited energy supply,
limited computing power, limited memory and limited bandwidth of the wireless links connecting sensor nodes [9].
The main design goal of WSN is to carry out data communication while trying to prolong the lifetime of the network
and prevent connectivity degradation by employing aggressive energy management techniques. The design of routing
protocols in WSNs is influenced by many challenging factors. In the following section, we summarize some of the
routing challenges and design issues that affect routing process in WSNs [5] [11].
 Node deployment: Node deployment in WSNs is application dependent and affects the performance of the routing
protocol. The deployment is either deterministic (manual) or self-organizing (random). In deterministic situations,
the sensors are manually placed and data is routed through pre-determined paths. Whereas in self-organizing
systems, the sensor nodes are scattered randomly creating an infrastructure in an ad hoc manner.
 Energy Conservation: During the creation of an infrastructure, the process of setting up the routes is greatly
influenced by energy considerations. Since the transmission power of a wireless radio is proportional to distance
squared or even higher order in the presence of obstacles, multi-hop routing will consume less energy than direct
communication.
 Fault Tolerance: If sensor nodes fail, MAC and routing protocols must accommodate formation of new links so that
sensor node failure should not affect the overall task of the sensor network.
 Scalability: The number of sensor nodes deployed in the sensing area may be in the order of hundreds or thousands,
or more. Any routing scheme must be able to work with this huge number of sensor nodes. In addition, sensor
network routing protocols should be scalable enough to respond to events in the environment.
 Network dynamics: Most of the network architectures assume that sensor nodes are stationary, because there are
very few setups that utilize mobile sensors. It is sometimes necessary to support the mobility of sinks or clusterheads (gateways).
 Coverage: In WSNs, each sensor node obtains a certain view of the environment. A given sensor's view of the
environment is limited both in range and in accuracy; it can only cover a limited physical area of the environment.
Hence, area coverage is also an important design parameter in WSNs.
 Connectivity: High node density in sensor networks precludes them from being completely isolated from each other.
Therefore, sensor nodes are expected to be highly connected.
 Sensor network topology: It must be maintained even with very high node density.
 Environment: Nodes should be operating in inaccessible location because of hostile environment.
 Production Costs: The cost of a single node must be low.
 Hardware Constraint: All Subunits of sensor node (e.g. sensing, processing, communication, power, location
finding system and mobilizer) must consume extremely low power [14] and be contained within an extremely
small volume.
 Transmission Media: Generally, Transmission Media is wireless (RF or Infrared), which is affected by fading and
high error rate and affect the operation of WSNs.
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
Page 314
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
ISSN 2319 - 4847
5. ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN WSN
a. Data Centric Protocols
i. Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation (SPIN): SPIN [1] [12] protocol was designed to improve
classic flooding protocols and overcome the problems they may cause, for example, implosion and overlap. The
SPIN protocols are resource aware and resource adaptive. The SPIN protocols are based on two key mechanisms
namely negotiation and resource adaptation. There are three messages defined in SPIN to exchange data between
nodes. These are:
a) ADV message to allow a sensor to advertise a particular meta-data,
b) REQ message to request the specific data and
c) DATA message that carry the actual data.
Fig. 2 summarizes the steps of the SPIN protocol.
Fig. 2 Steps of SPIN Protocol
ii. Directed Diffusion: Directed diffusion [13-14] is a data-centric routing protocol for sensor query dissemination
and processing. It meets the main requirements of WSNs such as energy efficiency, scalability, and robustness.
Directed diffusion has several key elements namely data naming, interests and gradients, data propagation, and
reinforcement. At the beginning of the directed diffusion process, the sink specifies a low data rate for incoming
events. After that, the sink can reinforce one particular sensor to send events with a higher data rate by resending
the original interest message with a smaller interval. Likewise, if a neighboring sensor receives this interest
message and finds that the sender's interest has a higher data rate than before, and this data rate is higher than
that of any existing gradient, it will reinforce one or more of its neighbors. Fig. 3 summarizes the Directed
Diffusion protocol.
Fig. 3 Directed diffusion protocol phases
iii. Rumor routing: Rumor routing is another variation of Directed Diffusion and is mainly intended for contexts
in which geographic routing criteria are not applicable. Rumor routing is a logical compromise between query
flooding and event flooding application schemes [15]. Rumor routing is an efficient protocol if the number of
queries is between the two intersection points of the curve of rumor routing with those of query flooding and
event flooding. Rumor routing is based on the concept of agent, which is a long-lived packet that traverses a
network and informs each sensor it encounters about the events that it has learned during its network traverse.
iv. COUGAR: COUGAR is an example of a data-centric approach which treats the whole network as a huge
distributed database system and use declarative queries in order to abstract query processing from the network
layer functions such as selection of relevant sensors [16]. COUGAR includes architecture for the sensor database
system where sensor nodes select a leader node among themselves to perform aggregation and transmit the data
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
Page 315
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
ISSN 2319 - 4847
to the BS. The BS is responsible for generating a query plan, which specifies the necessary information about the
data flow and in-network computation for the incoming query and send it to the relevant nodes. The query plan
also describes how to select a leader for the query. The architecture as depicted in Fig. 4 provides in-network
computation ability that can provide energy efficiency in situations when the generated data is huge independent
methods for data query.
Fig. 4 Query plan at a leader node: The leader node gets all the readings, calculates the average and if it is greater than
a threshold sends it to the gateway (sink)
v. ACQUIRE (Active Query Forwarding in Sensor Networks): ACQUIRE [17] is another data centric
querying mechanism used for querying named data.. It provides superior query optimization to answer specific
types of queries, called one-shot complex queries for replicated data. In this scheme, a node injects an active
query packet into the network. Neighboring nodes that detects that the packet contains obsolete information,
emits an update message to the node. Then, the node randomly selects a neighbor to propagate the query which
needs to resolve it. As the active query progress through network, it is progressively resolved into smaller and
smaller components until it is completely solved. Then, the query is returned back to the querying node as a
completed response.
vi. Energy-Aware Data-Centric Routing (EAD): EAD is a novel distributed routing protocol, which builds a
virtual backbone composed of active sensors that are responsible for in-network data processing and traffic
relaying [18]. In this protocol, a network is represented by a broadcast tree spanning all sensors in the network
and rooted at the gateway, in which all leaf nodes radios are turned off while all other nodes correspond to active
sensors forming the backbone and thus their radios are turned on.
b. Hierarchical Protocols
i. Low-energy adaptive clustering hierarchy (LEACH): LEACH [19-20] is the first and most popular energyefficient hierarchical clustering algorithm for WSNs that was proposed for reducing power consumption. The
idea is to form clusters of the sensor nodes based on the received signal strength and use local cluster heads as
routers to the sink. This will save energy since the transmissions will only be done by such cluster heads rather
than all sensor nodes. The three important features of LEACH are:
 Localized co-ordination and control for cluster setup.
 Randomized cluster head rotation.
 Local compression to reduce global data communication.
Fig.5 LEACH Protocol
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
Page 316
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
ISSN 2319 - 4847
ii. Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems (PEGASIS): PEGASIS [21] is an extension of
the LEACH protocol, Rather than forming multiple clusters, PEGASIS forms chains from sensor nodes so that
each node transmits and receives from a neighbor and only one node is selected from that chain to transmit to
the base station (sink). Gathered data moves from node to node, aggregated and eventually sent to the base
station. The chain construction is performed in a greedy way. As shown in Fig. 6 node c0 passes its data to node
c1. Node c1 aggregates node c0’s data with its own and then transmits to the leader. After node c2 passes the
token to node c4, node c4 transmits its data to node c3. Node c3 aggregates node c4’s data with its own and then
transmits to the leader. Node c2 waits to receive data from both neighbors and then aggregates its data with its
neighbor’s data. Finally, node c2 transmits one message to the base station.
Fig. 6 Chaining in PEGASIS
iii. Threshold Sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network Protocol (TEEN): TEEN) [22] is a hierarchical
protocol designed to be responsive to sudden changes in the sensed attributes such as temperature.
Responsiveness is important for time-critical applications, in which the network operated in a reactive mode.
TEEN pursues a hierarchical approach along with the use of a data-centric mechanism. The sensor network
architecture is based on a hierarchical grouping where closer nodes form clusters and this process goes on the
second level until base station (sink) is reached. The model is depicted in Fig. 7, which is redrawn from [22].
Fig. 7 Hierarchical Clustering in TEEN & APTEEN
iv. Adaptive Periodic Threshold Sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network Protocol (APTEEN): APTEEN
[23] is an improvement to TEEN to overcome its shortcomings and aims at both capturing periodic data
collections (LEACH) and reacting to time-critical events (TEEN). Thus, APTEEN is a hybrid clustering-based
routing protocol that allows the sensor to send their sensed data periodically and react to any sudden change in
the value of the sensed attribute by reporting the corresponding values to their CHs. The architecture of
APTEEN is same as in TEEN.
v. Hybrid Energy-Efficient Distributed Clustering (HEED): HEED extends the basic scheme of LEACH by
using residual energy and node degree or density as a metrics for cluster selection to achieve power balancing
[24]. It operates in multi-hop networks, using an adaptive transmission power in the inter-clustering
communication. HEED was proposed with four primary goals namely.
i. Prolonging network lifetime by distributing energy consumption,
ii. Terminating the clustering process within a constant number of iterations,
iii. Minimizing control overhead, and
iv. Producing well-distributed CHs and compact clusters.
c.
Location-based protocols
i. Geographic Adaptive Fidelity (GAF): GAF [25] is an energy-aware routing protocol primarily proposed for
MANETs, but can also be used for WSNs because it favors energy conservation. GAF conserves energy by
turning off unnecessary nodes in the network without affecting the level of routing fidelity. It forms a virtual grid
for the covered area. Each node uses its GPS-indicated location to associate itself with a point in the virtual grid.
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
Page 317
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
ISSN 2319 - 4847
Fig.8 State transitions in GAF protocol [29]
ii. Geographic and Energy-Aware Routing (GEAR): GEAR [26] is an energy-efficient routing protocol
proposed for routing queries to target regions in a sensor field, In GEAR, the sensors are supposed to have
localization hardware equipped, for example, a GPS unit or a localization system [14] so that they know their
current positions. Furthermore, the sensors are aware of their residual energy as well as the locations and
residual energy of each of their neighbors. GEAR uses energy aware heuristics that are based on geographical
information to select sensors to route a packet toward its destination region.
Fig.9 recursive geographic forwarding in GEAR [29]
iii. Minimum Energy Communication Network (MECN) [27] sets up and maintains a minimum energy network
for wireless networks by utilizing low power GPS. Although, the protocol assumes a mobile network, it is best
applicable to sensor networks, which are not mobile. A minimum power topology for stationary nodes including
a master node is found. MECN assumes a master-site as the information sink, which is always the case for
sensor networks.
iv. The small minimum energy communication network (SMECN) [28] is an extension to MECN. In MECN, it
is assumed that every node can transmit to every other node, which is not possible every time. In SMECN
possible obstacles between any pair of nodes are considered. However, the network is still assumed to be fully
connected as in the case of MECN.
6. CONCLUSION
Routing in sensor networks has attracted a lot of attention in the recent years and introduced unique challenges
compared to traditional data routing in wired networks. Routing protocols in WSNs is still an area of research as sensor
nodes are finding newer and newer applications with time. One of the main challenges in the design of routing
protocols for WSNs is energy efficiency due to the scarce energy resources of sensors. The ultimate objective behind the
routing protocol design is to keep the sensors operating for as long as possible, thus extending the network lifetime.
The energy consumption of the sensors is dominated by data transmission and reception. Therefore, routing protocols
designed for WSNs should be as energy efficient as possible to prolong the lifetime of individual sensors, and hence the
network lifetime.
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
Page 318
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
ISSN 2319 - 4847
REFERENCES
[1] W. Heinzelman, J. Kulik, and H. Balakrishnan, "Adaptive Protocols for Information Dissemination in Wireless
Sensor Networks," Proc. 5th ACM/IEEE Mobicom Conference (MobiCom '99), Seattle, WA, August, 1999. pp.
174-85.
[2] Rajashree. V. Biradar, V.C. Patil, Dr. S.R. Sawant, Dr. R.R. Mudholkar, “Classification and Comparison of
Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks” UbiCC Journal-Volume 4.
[3] Ian F. Akyildiz, Weilian Su, Yogesh Sankaraubramaniam, and Erdal Cayirci: A Survey on sensor networks, IEEE
Communications Magazine (2002).
[4] J. Pan, L. Cai, T. Hou, Y. Shi, and S. Shen: Topology control for wireless sensor networks, Proceedings of the Nineth
ACM MobiCom, (2003).
[5] J N.Al-Karaki, A E.Kamal: Routing Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks: A Survey,in the proceeding of in
IEEE Wireless Communications( Dec. 2004).
[6] Chien-Chung Shen, Chavalit Srisathapornphat, Chaiporn Jaikaeo: Sensor Information Networking Architecture
and Applications, IEEE Personal Communications, pp. 52-59 (August 2001).
[7] Kay Romer, Friedemann Mattern: The Design Space of Wireless Sensor Networks, IEEE Wireless
Communications, pp. 54-61 (December 2004).
[8] Sarjoun S. Doumit, Dharma P. Agrawal: Self-Organizing and Energy-Efficient Network of Sensors, IEEE, pp. 1-6
(2002).
[9] Al-Karaki,J.N,Al-Mashagbeh: Energy-Centric Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks Computers and
Communications, ISCC 06 Proceedings, 11th IEEE Symposium (2006).
[10] Wendi B. Heinzelman, Amy L. Murphy, Hervaldo S. Carvalho, Mark A. Perillo: Middleware to Support Sensor
Network Applications, IEEE Network, pp. 6-14, (January/February 2004).
[11] Prabhat Kumar, M.P. Singh, U.S. Triar, “A review of routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks”
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) Vol. 1 Issue 4, june-2012.
[12] J. Kulik, W. Heinzelman, and H. Balakrishnan, "Negotiation-based protocols for disseminating information in
wireless sensor networks", Wireless Networks, vol. 8, no. 2/3, Mar.-May 2002, pp. 169-185.
[13] C. Intanagonwiwat, R. Govindan, and D. Estrin, "Directed diffusion: A scalable and robust communication
paradigm for sensor networks", Proceedings ACM MobiCom'00, Boston, MA, Aug.2000, pp. 56-67.
[14] C. Intanagonwiwat, R. Govindan, D. Estrin, J. Heidemann, and F. Silva, "Directed diffusion for wireless sensor
networking", IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 11., no. 1, Feb. 2003, pp. 2-16.
[15] D. Braginsky and D. Estrin, "Rumor routing algorithm in sensor networks", Proceedings ACM WSNA, in
conjunction with ACM MobiCom'02,Atlanta, GA, Sept. 2002, pp. 22-31.
[16] Y. Yao and J. Gehrke, "The Cougar approach to in-network query processing in sensor networks", SGIMOD
Record, vol. 31, no. 3, Sept. 2002, pp. 9-18.
[17] N. Sadagopan, B. Krishnamachari, and A. Helmy, "The ACQUIRE mechanism for efficient querying in sensor
networks", Proceedings SNPA'03, Anchorage, AK, May 2003, pp. 149-155.
[18] A. Boukerche, X. Cheng, and J. Linus, "Energy-aware data-centric routing in microsensor networks", Proceedings
ACM MSWiM, in conjunction with ACM MobiCom, San Diego, CA, Sept. 2003, pp. 42-49.
[19] W.R. Heinzelman, A. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan, “Energy-efficient Communication Protocol for
Wireless Microsensor Networks”, in IEEE Computer Society Proceedings of the Thirty Third Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (HICSS '00), Washington, DC, USA, Jan. 2000, vol. 8, pp. 8020.
[20] W.R. Heinzelman, A. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan, “An Application-Specific Protocol Architecture for
Wireless Microsensor Networks” in IEEE Tmnsactions on Wireless Communications (October 2002), vol. 1(4), pp.
660-670.
[21] S. Lindsey and C.S. Raghavendra, “PEGASIS: Power-efficient Gathering in Sensor Information System”,
Proceedings IEEE Aerospace Conference, vol. 3, Big Sky, MT, Mar. 2002, pp. 1125-1130.
[22] A. Manjeshwar and D. P. Agrawal, “TEEN: A Protocol for Enhanced Efficiency in Wireless Sensor Networks," in
the Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Computing Issues in Wireless
Networks and Mobile Computing, San Francisco, CA, April 2001.
[23] A. Manjeshwar and D. P. Agrawal, "APTEEN: A Hybrid Protocol for Efficient Routing and Comprehensive
Information Retrieval in Wireless Sensor Networks", in the Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on
Parallel and Distributed Computing Issues in Wireless Networks and Mobile computing, San Francisco CA, April
2001, pp. 2009-1015.
[24] Ossama Younis and Sonia Fahmy” Heed: A hybrid, Energy-efficient, Distributed Clustering Approach for Ad-hoc
Networks”, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 3, no. 4, Oct.-Dec. 2004, pp. 366-369.
[25] Y. X:u, J. Heidemann, and D. Estrin, "Geography-informed energy conservation for ad-hoc routing", Proceedings
ACM/IEEE MobiCom'01, Rome, Italy, July 2001, pp. 70-84.
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
Page 319
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
ISSN 2319 - 4847
[26] Y. Yu, R. Govindan, and D. Estrin, "Geographical and energy aware routing: A recursive data dissemination
protocol for wireless sensor networks", Technical Report UCLA/CSD-TR-01-0023, UCLA Computer Science
Department, May 2001.
[27] V. Rodoplu and T.H. Ming, "Minimum energy mobile wireless networks," IEEE Journal of Selected Areas in
Communications, Vol. 17, No. 8, pp. 1333-1344, 1999.
[28] L. Li and J. Y Halpern, “Minimum energy mobile wireless networks revisited,” in the Proceedings of IEEE
International Conference on Communications (ICC’01), Helsinki, Finland, June 2001.
[29] Sinchan Roychowdhury , Chiranjib Patra, “Geographic Adaptive Fidelity and Geographic Energy Aware Routing
in Ad Hoc Routing”Special Issue of IJCCT Vol.1 Issue 2, 3, 4; 2010 for International Conference [ACCTA-2010],
3-5 August 2010.
AUTHOR
Ms. Neha Mehndiratta was born in Hansi, India in 1989. She received her B.Tech. degree in
Information Technology 2011 from MDU, Rohtak. She is pursuing her M.Tech Degree from MDU,
Rohtak in the branch Computer Science.
Ms. Manju was born in Hansi, India in 1987. She received her B.E degree in Computer Science in 2008
from MDU, Rohtak. She did her M.Tech Degree from Banasthali Vidyapeeth, Rajasthan in the branch
Computer Science. Thereafter she worked with BRCM College of Engineering and Technology Bahal,
Bhiwani (Haryana) as an Assistant Professor till June 28, 2012. Manju has authored 17 research Papers in
reputed International/National conferences/Journal proceedings. On July 2, 2012 she joined Faculty of
Engineering and Technology, Mody Institute of Technology and Science, Lakshmangarh (Rajasthan) as an Assistant
Professor in Computer Science Department and also pursuing Ph.D. from Faculty of Engineering and Technology,
Mody Institute of Technology and Science, Lakshmangarh (Rajasthan). Her Topic for Research is Energy Efficient
Wireless Sensor Networks.
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
Page 320