Wireless sensor network (WSN) is collection of large number of sensor nodes which senses the physical conditions of environment and send the data to sink. WSN can be classified as static and mobile WSN. In static routing protocol, energy consumption is not uniformly distributed. To avoid this problem, wireless sensor network with mobile sink can be used, where mobile sink gathers data from other nodes using 1-hop communication. In this paper, we presented the various types of WSN. At last, we compared the various routing protocol of WSN with mobile sink based on parameter no. of sinks, mobility of CH and mobility pattern.

1. Int. Journal of Electrical & Electronics Engg. Vol. 2, Spl. Issue 1 (2015) e-ISSN: 1694-2310 | p-ISSN: 1694-2426
15 NITTTR, Chandigarh EDIT-2015
A Survey on Routing Protocols in Wireless
Sensor Network Using Mobile Sink1
Deepak Kumar, 2
Deepali
1,2
CS Department, Guru Nanak College, Budhlada, India
Abstract— Wireless sensor network (WSN) is collection of
large number of sensor nodes which senses the physical
conditions of environment and send the data to sink. WSN
can be classified as static and mobile WSN. In static routing
protocol, energy consumption is not uniformly distributed. To
avoid this problem, wireless sensor network with mobile sink
can be used, where mobile sink gathers data from other nodes
using 1-hop communication. In this paper, we presented the
various types of WSN. At last, we compared the various
routing protocol of WSN with mobile sink based on
parameter no. of sinks, mobility of CH and mobility pattern.
Keywords—Static WSN. Mobile WSN, Sink node,Cluster head
I. INTRODUCTION
WSN is collection of large number of sensor nodes which
senses the physical conditions of environment and send the
data to sink. The various application of WSN is in military
area, environment area, health, home and other commercial
areas [1]. A sensor network design is influenced by many
factors like fault tolerance, scalability, production costs,
operating environment, transmission media and power
consumption.
WSN is divided into categories based on type of
communication: Single-hop and Multi-hop. In Single-hop
communication, CH directly sends their aggregate data to
sink. In Multi-hop, CH may send their aggregate to other
CH that is nearer to CH rather than sink directly. CH uses
one or more CH to send its data to sink.
Fig 1.1 shows the categorization of WSN. WSN can be
classified as static and mobile WSN. In static WSN, energy
efficient routing algorithm can be categorized as follows:
data centric routing algorithm, location based routing
algorithm and hierarchical routing algorithm. Data centric
routing algorithm finds route from multiple sources to
single destination by using metadata [2]. Location based
routing algorithm requires actual location information for
every sensor node. Hierarchical routing algorithm divides
the network into clusters [3]. Cluster head (CH) is elected
in each cluster. CH collects data from its members,
aggregates the data and sends to sink. This approach is
energy efficient but relatively complex than other
approaches.
Fig 1 Categorization of WSN
In WSN, mobility can be divided into three classes: sink
mobility, node mobility, relay agent mobility[4]. In sink
mobility, sink node’s position is not static throughout the
lifetime of network. With sink mobility, we can achieve
load balancing and longer network lifetime. In node
mobility, sensor nodes are mobile. It is further categorized
into two classes: Weak mobility, Strong mobility. In weak
mobility, mobility takes place due to death of some
network nodes. In strong mobility, mobility takes place
due to external factors. In relay agent mobility, the end
system is mobile. Sink mobility can be classified according
to movement as: random mobility, predictable mobility
and controlled mobility. In random mobility, nodes move
randomly in network. In predictable mobility, nodes move
along a trajectory with given speed. In controlled mobility,
external entity controls the node movement.
An outline of this paper is as follows. Section II presents
the Low Energy Adaptive Cluster Hierarchy (LEACH)
protocol. Section III presents the related work. Section IV
presents comparison of routing protocols based on mobile
sink WSN and section V describes the conclusion of the
paper.
II. LEACH Protocol
LEACH [5] is a cluster based approach in which both
sensor nodes and sink are stationary. LEACH works in
rounds. Each round begins with set up phase followed by
steady phase. In set up phase, CH is elected. Each node
generates random number between 0 and 1. This number is
compared with threshold value T(n) which is calculated by
using Eq. (1).
T(n) =
∗( )
if n ∈ G
0, Otherwise
(1)
Where P is percentage of CHs, r is number of rounds and
G is set of nodes that have not been CHs in the last 1/P
rounds. If the random value is less than T (n), the node
becomes CH for current round. In steady phase, all Non-
CH nodes send data to CH and then CH aggregate all data
and send it to the sink.
III. RELATED WORK
In [6] author proposed a protocol in which sink mobility is
considered for removing the problem of energy depletion
of nodes that are nearer to sink. In this, sink changes its
position when the energy of nearby nodes becomes low.
Sink moves to that zone which has maximum residual
energy. Simulation result shows that proposed protocol
Wireless Sensor
Network
Static WSN
Data
centric
Mobile WSN
Location
Based
Hierarchi
cal
Relay
agent
Mobility
Node
Mobility
Sink
Mobility
Weak
Mobility
Strong
Mobility

2. Int. Journal of Electrical & Electronics Engg. Vol. 2, Spl. Issue 1 (2015) e-ISSN: 1694-2310 | p-ISSN: 1694-2426
NITTTR, Chandigarh EDIT -2015 16
increase the network lifetime than the protocol that having
static nodes.
In [7] author proposed a protocol that using mobile sink. In
this protocol, when each round begins, clustering is
performed and CH get selected as in LEACH. All CHs
send a status packet across the network which gives the
information of maximum distance from sink supported by
CH for performing the data communication. Node’s
remaining energy and lifetime is tracked down for
calculation of this distance. The optimal point for sink is a
new location where data communication with all the CHs
can take place in minimum cost of energy. Simulation
result shows that proposed protocol increases network
lifetime.
In [8] author proposed a protocol that having both node
and sink mobility. In proposed protocol, after deployment
of sensor nodes, network is divided into clusters and each
cluster contains sensor node with different roles such that
gateway node, CH node and ordinary sensor node. Sink
selects a gateway node in each cluster which has highest
remaining energy and lowest mobility level. Sink selects
two CH in each cluster such that two nodes jointly can
cover the entire cluster. Ordinary nodes send their data to
CH. CH aggregates the data and send to gateway node.
Gateway node collects data from both CH and send to sink.
This hierarchical protocol reduces energy consumption and
increases network lifetime. Simulation results show that
the proposed protocol is better than CBR-Mobile in terms
of throughput, average energy consumption and network
lifetime.
In [9] author proposed a scheme based upon controlled
mobility of sink. In this protocol, mathematical model
Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) is used for
finding the path of sink such that it will consume less
energy and increase network lifetime. Simulation result
shows that the proposed scheme increases network
lifetime.
In [10] author proposed Mobile-Sink based Energy
efficient Clustering Algorithm (MECA).In this algorithm,
initially mobile sink is deployed at the edge of the sensing
field that moves along a fixed track and is predictable. Sink
only needs to broadcast its current location at the
beginning and that too just for once. After that, sensor
nodes keep record of initial position of sink and reduce
angle by:-
=
∗∆
(2)
Where is velocity, R is radius of transmission range and
∆ is time interval. In this, sensing field is divided into
equal sectors. In each sector, a node is selected as CH
based on residual energy. In setup phase, non-CHs send
their data to CH. After collecting data, CH aggregates that
data and sends it to the sink. MECA uses multi-hop
transmission for intra cluster routing for saving energy.
Simulation results show that MECA is better than LEACH
in terms of energy consumption.
In [11] author proposed Energy Efficient Competitive
protocol [20]. In this protocol, candidate CH is selected
based on probability. Each candidate CH computes
competition range as:-residual energy and node id.
Competition range is calculated as:
= × ( , ) + (3)
Where is maximum distance, is minimum
distance, ( , ) is distance between node and sink.
Candidate CHs that are in competition range will compete
for final CH based on residual energy. If two candidate
CHs have same residual energy and are in competition
range, then candidate CH having low node id will be
selected as CH. In setup phase, multi-hop communication
is take place. If the distance between CH and sink is less
than threshold value, then CH sends aggregate data directly
to sink. Else, CH send data to relay node. Each CH select
relay node as minimum cost node as:-
( ) = ∗
( , ) ( , )
( , ( , ) )
+ (1 − ) ∗
( ) ( )
( )
, [0,1] (4)
Where ( , ) is distance between node and node ,
SN is sink and ( ) is energy of node j. Sink is mobile
with certain speed and with predefined path. Sink has
scheduled park position. Each CH finds optimal park
position for sending their data to sink. Simulations results
show that mobile sink prolong network lifetime and
improve energy efficiency.
In [12] author proposed a protocol that having multiple
mobile sink. In this protocol, sensor nodes are deployed
randomly in the network. One sink node has fixed position
which controlled the other mobile sink nodes. Mobile sink
nodes collect the data from CHs which reduce
communication cost of CHs and increase the network
lifetime. Then mobile sink nodes send the aggregated data
to static sink. Simulation results show that proposed
algorithm is better than shortest hop path algorithm in
terms of network lifetime and packet delivery ratio.
IV.PROTOCOL COMPARISON
The papers surveyed have common objective which is to
uniformly distribute energy consumption by all sensor
nodes using mobile sink. This improves the overall lifetime
of the network. Protocols discussed in section III are
compared and presented in Table 1.
COMPARISON OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE WSN
Protoc
ol
Characteristics
No. of
sinks
Mobility is
provided to Mobility
pattern
Sink
CH
[6] Multiple Mobile Static
Random and
Predefined
[7] Single Mobile Static Controlled
[8] Single Mobile Mobile Random
[9] Single
Mobile
Static
Controlled
[10] Multiple Mobile Static Predefined
[11] Single
Mobile Static Predefined and
Controlled
[12] Multiple
Mobile Static Random and
predefined
[13] Multiple
Mobile Static Random and
predefined

3. Int. Journal of Electrical & Electronics Engg. Vol. 2, Spl. Issue 1 (2015) e-ISSN: 1694-2310 | p-ISSN: 1694-2426
17 NITTTR, Chandigarh EDIT-2015
V. CONCLUSION
In static WSN energy consumption is not uniformly
distributed between all sensor nodes of the network. This
causes a limited network lifetime. To avoid this problem,
wireless sensor network with mobile sink can be used. In
this paper, we presented the various types of WSN. At last,
we compared the various routing protocol of WSN with
mobile sink based on parameter.
REFERENCES
.F.Akyildiz,W. Su, Y. Sankarassubramaniam, E.Cayirci, “Wireless Sensor
Networks: a survey,” Computer Networks(Elsevier), vol. 38, pp. 393-
422, 2002.
B.Krishnamachari, D.Estrin, S.Wicker, “Modelling Data-centric routing
in Wireless sensor network,” IEEE Infocom, pp. 1-11, 2002.
Prabagarane, C. A.Navin, Partibane, Nagarajan, V. Krishnakiran,
“Hierarchictal routing algorithm for cluster based multi hop Mobile
Adhoc network,” IEEE Communication Society, pp. 1116-1120, 2004.
A.Raja, X. Su, “Mobility handling in mac for wireless ad hoc networks,”
Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. ,Vol. 9, pp. 303-311, 2009.
W.R.Heinzelman, “Energy-Efficient Communication Protocol for
Wireless Microsensor Networks,” Proc. of the 33rd
Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1-10, 2000.
M.Marta, M.Cardei, “Using Sink Mobility to increase Wireless sensor
Network lifetime,” IEEE 2008.
M.H.Khodashahi, F.Tashtarian, M.H.Y. Moghaddam, M.T.Honary,
“Optimal Location of Mobile sink in Wireless Sensoe,” IEEE
Communication Society, 2010.
H.K.D. Sarma, A.Kar, R.Mall, “Energy Efficient Routing protocol
Wireless sensor networks with node and sink Mobility,” IEEE, 2011.
F.Tashtarian, M.H.Y. Moghaddam, S.Effati, “Energy Efficient Data
Gathering Algorithm in Hierarchical Wireless sensor network with
Mobile Sink,” Proc. of 2nd
International Conference on Computer and
Knowledge Engineering, pp. 232-237, 2012.
J.Wang, Y.Yin, J.U.Kim, S.Lee, C.F,Lai, “An Mobile-sonk Based Energy
Efficient Clustering Algorithm for Wireless sensor networks,” Proc. of
12th
International Conference on Computer and Information Technology,
pp. 678-683, 2012.
J.Wang, X.Yang, Tinghuai, M.Wuz, J.Kim, “An Energy-efficient
Competitive Clustering algorithm for Wireless sensor networks using
Mobile Sink,” International Journal of Grid and Distributed Computing,
vol. 5, pp. 79-92, 2012.
V.Jose, G.Sadashivappa, “A Novel Energy efficient Routing algorithm for
wireless sensor network using Sink Mobility,” International Journal of
Wireless & Mobile Networks, vol. 6, pp. 15-25, 2014.