Objective: The study explores two well-known energy-efficient routing algorithms, LEACH (Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy) and PEGASIS (Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems), in the context of wireless sensor networks (WSNs) with mobile in terms of energy utilisation, network longevity, and communication efficiency when people are moving around in the real world. Methods: We use the similar simulation framework for both LEACH and PEGASIS in First-Order Radio Energy Model to create a wireless sensor network (WSN) with 100 mobile sensor nodes randomly placed in a 100m by 100m field. We used the Random Waypoint concept to make things move. We checked how well it performed by looking at factors like how much energy was left over after each round, how fast nodes died, and how many packets were transmitted to the base station. Results: PEGASIS used less energy and lasted longer than other networks since it had a chain-based design and sent data every cycle. This was especially true for networks with nodes that were equally distributed and not very mobile. But it had a more sophisticated algorithm and fewer rounds of communication. LEACH was easier to operate and could be utilised on a bigger scale, but it used more energy because the cluster heads spun more often and the distances between transmissions were longer. In general, PEGASIS was more stable when there wasn't a lot of energy, but LEACH worked better when the topologies varied over time. Novelty: This study looks at LEACH and PEGASIS side by side in a simulation and analysis, utilising the identical parameters for node mobility and deployment. It demonstrates the pros and cons of being able to grow and save energy. One key new notion is that a hybrid technique that combines the clustering efficiency of LEACH with the energy-saving chain mechanism of PEGASIS could make WSN routing protocols for mobile contexts stronger and more scalable. Keywords: Energy-constrained Sensor networks, Greedy Method, LEACH, Node Mobility, PEGASIS, WSN
Bansal et al. (Tue,) studied this question.