4.7 Article

An energy-efficient data gathering algorithm to prolong lifetime of wireless sensor networks

Journal

COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 33, Issue 5, Pages 639-647

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.comcom.2009.11.008

Keywords

Wireless sensor network; Routing algorithms; Network lifetime; Energy saving

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [60873228]
  2. Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [Y1080483, Y1090781]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nodes in most wireless sensor networks (WSNs) are powered by batteries with limited energy. Prolonging network lifetime and saving energy are two critical issues for WSNs. Some energy-saving routing algorithms like minimum spanning tree based ones can reduce total energy consumption of a WSN, but they place too heavy burden of forwarding data packets on several key nodes so that these nodes quickly drain out available battery energy, making network lifetime shortened. In this paper, a routing algorithm termed Energy-efficient Routing Algorithm to Prolong Lifetime (ERAPL) is proposed, which is able to dramatically prolong network lifetime while efficiently expends energy. In the ERAPL a data gathering sequence (DGS), used to avoid mutual transmission and loop transmission among nodes, is constructed, and each node proportionally transmits traffic to the links confined in the DGS. In addition, a mathematical programming model, in which minimal remaining energy of nodes and total energy consumption are included, is presented to optimize network lifetime. Moreover, genetic algorithms are used to find the optimal solution of the proposed programming problem. Further, simulation experiments are conducted to compare the ERAPL with some well-known routing algorithms and simulation results show the ERAPL outperforms them in terms of network lifetime. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available