Hierarchical Routing Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks: Functional and Performance Analysis

Table 1

Comparative analysis of routing protocols for WSN.

WSN routing protocol	AF	D/C	H/NH	TH level used	PE	SL	HC	EE (%)
LEACH	—	Distributed	Homogeneous	No	Hybrid	Limited	Single hop	—
MODLEACH	(i) Uses threshold level for CH selection	Distributed	Homogeneous	Yes	Hybrid	Limited	Single hop	28%
MODLEACHHT	(i) Uses hard threshold	Distributed	Homogeneous	Yes	Hybrid	Limited	Single hop	83%
MODLEACHST	(i) Uses soft threshold	Distributed	Homogeneous	Yes	Hybrid	Limited	Single hop	122%
TLHCLP	(i) BS installed at the center of network area	Distributed	Homogeneous	No	Hybrid	Good	Multihop	17%
FL-LEACH	(i) Apply fuzzy logic to find exact number of CHs	Distributed	Homogeneous	No	Hybrid	Limited	Single hop	51%
LEACH-GPS	(i) Nodes equipped with GPS functionality	Distributed	Homogeneous	No	Hybrid	Very good	Multihop	137%
A-LEACH	(i) Introduces load-sharing technique	Distributed	Homogeneous	No	Hybrid	Good	Multihop	20%
AZR-LEACH	(i) It is assumed that dimensions of network and BS position are known	Distributed	Homogeneous	No	Hybrid	No	Multihop	40%
IBLEACH	(i) It transfers aggregation load to sensor nodes	Distributed	Homogeneous	No	Hybrid	Limited	Single hop	60%
LEACH-C	(i) Nodes equipped with GPS/tracking facility	Centralized	Homogeneous	No	Hybrid	Good	Single hop	13%
Cell-LEACH	(i) Clusters further divided into cells with cell head and CH	Distributed	Homogeneous	Yes	Proactive	Good	Multihop
LEACH-Mobile	(i) Nodes/CHs mobility; (ii) Suitable for mobility-centric environments	Distributed	Homogeneous	Yes	Reactive	Very good	Single hop
EE-MRP	(i) Hybrid communication mechanism adopted; (ii) Forwarder node introduced	Distributed	Homogeneous	Yes	Hybrid	Very good	Single hop	155%