International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive System (IJPEDS)

Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025, pp. 1939~1948

ISSN: 2088-8694, DOI: 10.11591/ijpeds.v16.i3.pp1939-1948  1939

Cluster-based routing protocol in wireless sensor network

Shireen Bashar Ghanem, Aws Zuheer Yonis

Department of Electronic Engineering, College of Electronics Engineering, Ninevah University, Mosul, Iraq

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) play a crucial role in various domains,
including military, industrial, and environmental applications, due to their
Received Sep 9, 2024 capability to monitor and transmit data efficiently. However, one of the
Revised Apr 30, 2025 major challenges in WSNs is energy consumption, as sensor nodes rely on
Accepted May 25, 2025 limited power sources for data acquisition, processing, and communication.
Efficient energy management is essential to prolong network lifespan and
maintain performance. To address this issue, several energy-efficient routing
Keywords: techniques have been developed. Among these, the low-energy adaptive
clustering hierarchy (LEACH) has gained significant attention for its ability
Energy efficiency to optimize power consumption through hierarchical clustering. This study
LEACH protocol investigates the performance of the LEACH protocol under different
Network lifetime deployment configurations. We proposed and evaluate a circular sensing
Routing protocols field as an alternative to the traditional square and rectangular field.
Sensor node Simulation results show that the circular field achieves better energy
Wireless sensor network efficiency and network longevity across various packet sizes and base station
(BS) locations. These findings highlight the importance of deployment
geometry in enhancing WSN sustainability.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Aws Zuheer Yonis
Department of Electronic Engineering, College of Electronics Engineering, Ninevah University
Mosul, Iraq
Email: [Link]@[Link]

1. INTRODUCTION
Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) have gained popularity due to their use in various disciplines and
real-time applications [1]. These networks consist of numerous small, separate sensing nodes placed in
difficult-to-reach areas [2]. Wireless sensors are micro-electro-mechanical system devices (MEMS) with
sensing, processing, communication, and power units [3], as shown in Figure 1. The application-specific
sensing subsystem uses multiple sensors, while processors in the computing subsystem compute and analyze
sensor data. Moreover, communication system technology allows sensor nodes to wirelessly link and share
data, while the power subsystem powers the system [4]. These nodes detect environmental elements, record
events, analyze data, and send it to a BS. Data can include temperature, water levels, air humidity, and other
physical events [5]. Sensor node publishing sites are challenging to access, and for successful monitoring,
they must remain in place. WSN research focuses on energy efficiency to extend battery life and network
reliability. Proper energy distribution is a top priority to prevent sensor node depletion [6]-[10]. Routing
protocol design is an active research field contributing to prolonging network life.
Cluster-based and hierarchical routing methods are popular for extending network lifespans and
improving energy efficiency [11]. The cluster head (CH) collects data from member nodes, reducing BS data
transfer. Clustering and data transmission continue until all nodes' batteries die [12], [13]. Most validated
clustering approaches focus on CH selection, which mediates between sensor and sink nodes and is critical

Journal homepage: [Link]

1940  ISSN: 2088-8694

for WSN energy economy estimation [14]. Wireless power transfer (WPT) technologies can also address
energy problems in WSNs [15], [16].
This work intends to improve cluster-based routing mechanisms, thereby increasing energy
efficiency and extending network lifetime in WSNs. The following sums up the main goals and contributions
of this research:
− Presenting a better CH selection method whereby, as in the traditional LEACH process, CHs are chosen
every ten rounds instead of every round. This lowers energy consumption and helps to minimize the
overhead connected with regular CH elections.
− Letting direct transmission for nodes close to the BS, so saving energy by removing the need for them
to form a cluster.
− Using an adaptive communication system whereby nodes are driven by energy-aware conditions rather
than limited to joining the closest CH or BS depending solely on distance.
− Suggesting a circular deployment area for WSN nodes and contrasting its performance with the square
field layout. Under different BS positions and packet sizes, the simulation results show that the circular
field generates improved energy distribution and a longer network lifetime.
The paper is organized as follows: section 2 discusses WSN routing protocols; section 3 discusses
the related work; section 4 discusses model of the network and radio communication system; section 5
discusses simulation setup; section 6 discusses results; and section 7 discusses conclusion.

Figure 1. Architecture of sensing node [17]

2. WSN ROUTING PROTOCOLS

Routing protocols are reactive, proactive, or mixed. Reactive paths are computed only when needed,
while proactive paths are pre-calculated and saved in a routing table for each node, making them undesirable
in networks with hundreds of sensing nodes. Mixed therapies combine reactive and proactive methods.
Location-based, hierarchical, and flat routing protocols are utilized in network flow design. Flat-routing
increase data redundancy by assigning similar jobs to sensor nodes that give data independently [18].
Hierarchical protocols aim to maximize network efficiency, longevity, scalability, and sensor node range. CH
selection and cluster routing achieve this [18]. Location-based protocols include sensor node distance and
data transmission energy.

3. RELATED WORK
Researchers developed hierarchical routing technology as an approach to maximize wireless sensor
network (WSN) operational lifetime. W.B. Heinzelman introduced LEACH in 2000 as the initial protocol to
implement this methodology according to [19]. LEACH enables nodes in networks to construct regional
groupings with each member having a central supervisory node. The cluster head (CH) takes charge of data
collection from all cluster members while performing data processing before sending information to remote
base station (BS) as Figure 2 demonstrates. The application of CH functionality increases a node's power
consumption beyond non-cluster head nodes thus creating a potential problem that network cluster operations
cease if a CH becomes inoperable [20], [21].
LEACH achieves equilibrium in energy expenses between nodes by rotating the cluster head
position randomly thus preventing sensors from rapid battery depletion [23]. The cluster-head node creates a
time-division multiple access (TDMA) schedule to enable node-to-node data transmission without generating
cluster-wide signal collusions. A specific data communication schedule exists for clusters which takes into

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1939-1948
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1941

account entire member knowledge to ensure efficient cluster communication [24]. LEACH follows a
systematic operation pattern where cluster formation occurs as the first stage of each cycle. Data collection
occurs in the steady-state phase where the nodes send their collected data through the CH to the base station
(BS) as illustrated in Figure 3 [24].

Figure 2. Cluster formation in LEACH [22]

Figure 3. Operation of LEACH [25]

Set-up phase: Every node makes its own evaluation for becoming the cluster head during this phase
of the network. During this process node n creates a random value that ranges from 0 to 1 to determine the
decision. The node selects to act as CH for the current round when its produced random number satisfies the
condition specified as shown in (1) T(n).
𝑝
𝑇(𝑛) = 1 𝑛∈𝐺 (1)
1−𝑝×(𝑟×𝑚𝑜𝑑 )
𝑝

G is composed of all nodes that did not function as CH in the last 1/P rounds, while P stands for CH
proportion and n indicates the total node count, along with r representing the current round [26]. Using CDMA
as its communication method, each CH node broadcasts ADV messages toward all neighboring nodes. The
devices employed under regular nodes join the closest cluster head, while cluster head devices manage data
transfer using time division multiple access (TDMA) through designated time slots. [27]. Steady-state phase:
During the steady operating state, cluster nodes send their data to the designated Cluster Head through the
assigned communication slot. The base station receives consolidated data from the CH through an efficient
power-saving process. The stable phase extends to exceed the time duration of the cluster setup phase [28].

4. MODEL OF THE NETWORK AND RADIO COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

The energy model draws power for radio circuits and power amplifiers in both transmitter and
receiver units, as Figure 4 displays. Based on the transmitter-receiver distance, the testing applied either free-
space (d² power loss) or multipath fading (d⁴ power loss) channel models. Specific control of the power
amplifier helps minimize the transmission power wastage. Researchers prefer to employ the multipath (mp)
model unless the distance is below a specific threshold (do) when they apply the free-space (fs) model. A
radio will require transferring a k-bit message through d distance [15], (2), (3), and (4) provide the expression
for the transmitted and received energy over k-bits.

ETx (k, d) = ETx−elec (k) + ETx−amp (k, d) (2)

k × 𝐸𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐 + k × 𝜀𝑓𝑠 × d2 d < 𝑑𝑜

𝐸𝑇𝑥 (k, d) = { (3)
k × 𝐸𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐 + k × 𝐸𝑇𝑥−𝑎𝑚𝑝 × d4 d ≥ 𝑑𝑜

ERx = k × Eelec (4)

The energy throughput for a k-bit packet sent across d distance expresses the transmission
requirements. ETX-elec(k) describes the amount of electrical circuit energy required for both transmission

Cluster-based routing protocol in wireless sensor network (Shireen Bashar Ghanim)

1942  ISSN: 2088-8694

and reception processes relating to k bits. The computation of ETX-amp(k,d) includes amplification energy
together with packet length and sender-receiver distance parameters. A data packet reception requires energy
which is represented by ERX(k).

𝑑𝑜 = √εfs⁄ETx−amp (5)

d = √(𝑥2 − 𝑥1 )2 + (𝑦2 − 𝑦1 )2 (6)

The amplifier energy, εfs d2 or ETX-amp d4, is dependent on the distance to the receiver and the permissible bit-
error rate, whereas the electronics energy, Eelec, is determined by parameters including digital coding,
modulation, filtering, and signal spreading.

Figure 4. Radio energy dissipation model [24]

5. SIMULATION SETUP
A simulation was run using 80 homogeneous nodes, each with a starting energy level of 0.5 J. These
nodes were arranged at random over a sensor field of 100 × 100 m 2. In another scenario, the same number of
nodes was deployed inside a circular field with a radius of 50 m and a central at (50,50) to examine the effect
of the field shape on energy consumption and network lifetime. The BS was positioned at two different
locations: one near the center of the field at (30,30), and another far at (70,150) The sent packets included
2000,4000 bits, with 100 bits reserved for control packets. The parameters of the simulation model were
modified as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Simulation model’s parameter

Parameters Values Parameters Values
Field shape Square (100×100 m2) and circular (radius = 50 m, Amplification energy for short 10 PJ/bit/m2
center at (50,50)) distances
Number of sensor nodes 80 Receiver energy 50 nJ/bit
Location of the base station (75,150), (30,30) Amplification energy for long 0.0013PJ/bit/m2
distances
Packet size 2000,4000 bits Data aggregation energy 0.0013PJ/bit/m2
Initial energy for each node 0.5 J/node Simulation rounds 5000
Transmitter energy 50 nJ/bit Environment MATLAB

6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The research investigates different LEACH protocol deployments through simulation to study how
WSNs respond to field designs and protocol control parameter selections in terms of energy management and
performance results. Network lifetime with energy usage gets examined through analyzing field
configurations and base station placement and packet size measurements. The stability and lifetime
assessment of the network relies on three crucial performance indicators which include active node count and
energy usage rate and network failure events. As depicted in Figure 5 the sensor nodes enqueuer their
positions into square and round fields at different locations of the base station. The BS shows a green star
indicator among normal nodes which connect to cluster head devices (CHs).
To analyze the effect of BS location, field shape, and packet size on network lifetime, two BS
positions are considered: a near position at (30,30) and a distant position at (70,150). For each location, two
packet sizes are tested—2000 bits and 4000 bits. Figures 6 and 7 present the number of alive nodes over
simulation rounds for these configurations. Figures 6(a) and 7(a) represent the results with 2000-bit packets,
and Figures 6(b) and 7(b) show the results with 4000-bit packets. Within each subplot, a direct comparison is
made between square and circular fields, providing a clear view of how deployment geometry affects the
longevity of the network under different conditions.

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1939-1948
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1943

As shown in Figure 6, when the BS is located at (30,30), the circular field demonstrates a better
performance in maintaining active nodes over time compared to the square field. In Figure 6(a), with a
2000 bits packet size, the first node dies (FND) occurs later in the circular field, indicating more efficient
energy distribution. In Figure 6(b), although both fields show a reduction in lifetime due to the increased
packet size, the circular topology still maintains an advantage, highlighting the benefits of compact node
arrangement when the BS is centrally placed.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 5. Network deployment with different BS positions: (a) square, BS at (30,30);

(b) circle, BS at (30,30); (c) square, BS at (75,150); and (d) circle, BS at (75,150)

(a)

(b)

Figure 6. Network lifetime with BS at (30,30): (a) packet size = 2000 bits and (b) packet size = 4000 bits

Cluster-based routing protocol in wireless sensor network (Shireen Bashar Ghanim)

1944  ISSN: 2088-8694

Figure 7 shows the network lifetime results when the BS is placed at a farther location (70,150). In
this scenario, the gap between square and circular fields becomes narrower. Figure 7(a) indicates that both
fields experience earlier node deaths due to the increased average transmission distance. With 4000-bit
packets (Figure 7(b)), the network lifetime is significantly reduced in both cases, but the circular field still
slightly outperforms the square one in terms of stability and delay in FND and LND. These results suggest
that the BS location plays a more dominant role when positioned far from the sensor field.

(a)

(b)

Figure 7. Network lifetime with BS at (75,150): (a) packet size = 2000 bits; (b) packet size = 4000 bits

To complement the graphical analysis of network lifetime, Table 2 summarizes the key node death
statistics across all simulation scenarios. These metrics include the round at which the first node dies (FND),
the round at which half of the nodes are dead (HND), and the last node dies (LND). The table covers all
combinations of field shape (square and circular), BS location ((30,30) and (70,150)), and packet size (2000
bits and 4000 bits). This numerical summary provides a clearer view of the differences observed in the
simulation figures and allows for direct comparison between deployment strategies.
The data in Table 2 indicates that circular field deployments consistently outperform square ones
across all performance metrics. For instance, scenario S1 (circular field, BS at (30,30), 2000-bit packets)
records the highest LND of 3315 rounds, while scenario S8 (square field, BS at (75,150), 4000-bit packets)
records the lowest LND of 1585 rounds. This confirms that circular topologies better distribute energy
consumption, likely due to more centralized communication paths. Moreover, placing the base station closer
to the sensor nodes (e.g., at (30,30)) leads to significantly improved network lifetime. When the BS is
relocated to (75,150), a drop is observed in all three metrics—FND, HND, and LND—regardless of the field
shape. Additionally, increasing the packet size from 2000 to 4000 bits negatively impacts energy efficiency,
as seen in scenarios S1 vs S3 and S2 vs S4. This is attributed to the higher energy demand for transmitting
larger packets. Overall, the combination of a circular field, a centrally placed BS, and smaller packet sizes
proves to be the most energy-efficient configuration, leading to extended network operation.

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1939-1948
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1945

In addition to network lifetime, energy consumption plays a vital role in evaluating the performance
and sustainability of WSNs. Figures 8 and 9 present the total energy consumption under two distinct BS
locations: (30,30) and (75,150). Each figure includes two subplots for different packet sizes (2000 bits and
4000 bits), allowing for a comprehensive comparison between circular and square field deployments.
As shown in Figure 8(a), the circular deployment consumed less energy compared to the square
configuration, particularly at lower packet sizes. This can be attributed to more uniform node distribution and
shorter average transmission distances. In Figure 8(b), although the overall energy consumption increased
due to larger packet size, the circular area still maintained better energy efficiency.
Figure 9 shows the BS outside the sensing field at distances of 75 m and 150 m. At 2000-bit packet
size (Figure 9(a)), the circular field again outperforms the square field, achieving around 3000 rounds versus
just 2700 rounds. However, when the packet size is increased to 4000 bits (Figure 9(b)), both topologies have
drastically shorter lifetimes: the circular field lasts approximately 1700 cycles, while the square field lasts
less than 1600 rounds. These findings demonstrate how field shape, BS location, and packet size all influence
network efficiency and longevity, with circular fields providing greater resilience in both internal and
external BS scenarios.

Table 2. Comparison of network performance metrics across different field shapes, BS locations,
and packet sizes
Scenario Field BS Packet size FND HND LND
S1 Circle (30,30) 2000 bits 2481 2904 3315
S2 Square (30,30) 2000 bits 2314 2628 2925
S3 Circle (30,30) 4000 bits 1588 1702 1876
S4 Square (30,30) 4000 bits 1439 1567 1738
S5 Circle (75,150) 2000 bits 1615 2310 2941
S6 Square (75,150) 2000 bits 1345 2081 2800
S7 Circle (75,150) 4000 bits 857 1326 1660
S8 Square (75,150) 4000 bits 709 1266 1585

(a)

(b)

Figure 8. Consumer energy for BS location at (30,30): (a) 2000 bits packets; and (b) 4000 bits packets under
circular and square field

Cluster-based routing protocol in wireless sensor network (Shireen Bashar Ghanim)

1946  ISSN: 2088-8694

(a)

(b)

Figure 9. Consumer energy for BS location at (75,150): (a) 2000 bits packets; (b) 4000 bits packets under
circular and square field

This paper looks at how stable networks are in WSNs by assessing how different field shapes, BS
locations, packet sizes, and energy distribution affect network performance. We summarize the main
achievements and contributions as follows:
− Effect of field shape: Under the same conditions, circular fields often provide better FND, HND, and
LND values than square fields. This conclusion suggests that circular setups may use energy more
evenly because they spread out the nodes better and have shorter average communication distances.
− Impact of BS locations: Placing the BS closer to the center of the field—that is, at coordinates (30,
30)—improves network performance and increases node lifespan. In 2000-bit situations (S1 and S2, for
example), circular field nodes remain far longer than those in the square field. Relocating the BS to a
distant location (75,150) does, however, clearly reduce lifespan measurements for both field types, with
square fields most negatively impacted.
− Influence of packet sizes: Increasing the packet size from 2000 bits to 4000 bits lowers all lifespan
measurements in every situation. We predict this result because larger packets consume more
transmission energy, which speeds up node depletion. For a circular field with the BS at (30,30), for
instance, the LND lowers from 3315 rounds (S1) to 1876 rounds (S3) because of the higher packet size.
− Optimal configuration: S1 (circular field, BS at 30,30, and 2000-bit packets) obtains the best-
performing scenario with regard to node lifespan. On the other hand, S8 (square field, BS at 75,150, and
4000-bit packets) displays the lowest performance, therefore verifying that greater communication
distances coupled with bigger data contents rapidly drain node energy.

7. CONCLUSION
In the study, the effects of deployment topologies, BS placements, and packet sizes on energy
efficiency and network lifetime of wireless sensor networks (WSNs) with LEACH protocol are studied. The
findings indicate that circular field deployments are better in terms of network lifetime compared to square

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1939-1948
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1947

topologies because of uniformity in energy consumption and shorter communication ranges that results in
better energy efficiency. BS location has a great importance on the network performance, where centrally
located BSs (e.g. at (30,30)) results in extension of lifetime as the communication distance will be less. In
contrast, a remote BS (e.g. at (75,150)) reduces network lifetime, particularly in square field cases. Also, the
fact that the packet size is increased to 4000 bits reduces the network lifetime since more energy is needed to
transmit the packet. The best configuration that gives maximized network life is a circular field structure
where the BS is placed at the center and uses smaller packets as the size. The paper highlights that one of the
key factors to increase the sustainability of WSN is the use of energy-efficient deployment procedures, which
include placing central BSs or circular topologies. Future works can be done on hybrid topologies, energy
harvesting and optimization of routing protocols to enhance efficiency of WSN.

FUNDING INFORMATION
Authors state no funding involved.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS STATEMENT

This study used the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) to accurately describe each author's
contribution. The contributions of each author are summarized as follows:

Name of Author C M So Va Fo I R D O E Vi Su P Fu
Shireen Bashar Ghanem ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Aws Zuheer Yonis ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

C : Conceptualization I : Investigation Vi : Visualization

M : Methodology R : Resources Su : Supervision
So : Software D : Data Curation P : Project administration
Va : Validation O : Writing - Original Draft Fu : Funding acquisition
Fo : Formal analysis E : Writing - Review & Editing

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships
that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

DATA AVAILABILITY
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [AZY],
upon reasonable request. Data availability is not applicable to this paper as no new data were created or
analyzed in this study.

REFERENCES
[1] M. S. Bin Tamrin and M. R. Ahmad, “Simulation of adaptive power management circuit for hybrid energy harvester and real-time
sensing application,” International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 658–666, 2020, doi:
10.11591/ijpeds.v11.i2.pp658-666.
[2] K. Sohraby, D. Minoli, and T. Znati, Wireless sensor networks: technology, protocols, and applications. John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
[3] N. Wang and H. Zhu, “An energy efficient algrithm based on LEACH protocol,” in 2012 International Conference on Computer
Science and Electronics Engineering, Mar. 2012, pp. 339–342. doi: 10.1109/ICCSEE.2012.150.
[4] M. Chovanec, J. Púchyová, M. Hudik, and M. Kochláň, “Universal synchronization algorithm for wireless sensor networks—
``FUSA algorithm’’,” Sep. 2014, pp. 1001–1007. doi: 10.15439/2014F270.
[5] A. M. Bongale, A. Swarup, and S. Shivam, “EiP-LEACH: Energy influenced probability based LEACH protocol for wireless
sensor network,” in 2017 International Conference on Emerging Trends & Innovation in ICT (ICEI), Feb. 2017, pp. 77–81. doi:
10.1109/ETIICT.2017.7977014.
[6] N. Qubbaj, A. A. Taleb, and W. Salameh, “Review on LEACH protocol,” in 2020 11th International Conference on Information
and Communication Systems (ICICS), Apr. 2020, pp. 414–419. doi: 10.1109/ICICS49469.2020.239516.
[7] M. M. Zanjireh and H. Larijani, “A survey on centralised and distributed clustering routing algorithms for WSNs,” in 2015 IEEE
81st Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), May 2015, pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/VTCSpring.2015.7145650.
[8] M. M. Zanjireh, A. Shahrabi, and H. Larijani, “ANCH: A new clustering algorithm for wireless sensor networks,” in 2013 27th
International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications Workshops, Mar. 2013, pp. 450–455. doi:
10.1109/WAINA.2013.242.
[9] M. M. Zanjireh, H. Larijani, and W. O. Popoola, “Activity-aware clustering algorithm for wireless sensor networks,” in 2014 9th
International Symposium on Communication Systems, Networks & Digital Sign (CSNDSP), Jul. 2014, pp. 122–127. doi:
10.1109/CSNDSP.2014.6923810.
[10] M. Mathew and N. Weng, “Quality of information and energy efficiency optimization for sensor networks via adaptive sensing
and transmitting,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 341–348, Feb. 2014, doi: 10.1109/JSEN.2013.2282774.

Cluster-based routing protocol in wireless sensor network (Shireen Bashar Ghanim)

1948  ISSN: 2088-8694

[11] A. A. Abbasi and M. Younis, “A survey on clustering algorithms for wireless sensor networks,” Computer Communications, vol.
30, no. 14–15, pp. 2826–2841, Oct. 2007, doi: 10.1016/[Link].2007.05.024.
[12] S. K. Singh, M. P. Singh, A. Professor, and D. K. Singh, “A survey of energy-efficient hierarchical cluster-based routing in wireless
sensor networks,” International Journal of Advanced Networking and Applications (IJANA), vol. 570, no. 02, pp. 2–570, 2010.
[13] C. Silva et al., “A cluster-based approach to provide energy-efficient in WSN,” International Journal of Computer Science and
Network Security (IJCSNS), vol. 13, no. 1, p. 55, 2013.
[14] N. Saadallah, S. Alabady, and F. Al-Turjman, “Energy-efficient cluster head selection via genetic algorithm,” Al-Rafidain
Engineering Journal (AREJ), vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 12–25, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.33899/rengj.2023.143955.1293.
[15] R. E. Nafiaa and A. Z. Yonis, “Analysis of frequency splitting phenomenon in WPT for intelligent applications,” in 2022 IEEE
International Conference on Automatic Control and Intelligent Systems (I2CACIS), Jun. 2022, pp. 174–179. doi:
10.1109/I2CACIS54679.2022.9815489.
[16] R. E. Nafiaa and A. Z. Yonis, “Magnetic resonance coupling wireless power transfer for green technologies,” Indonesian Journal
of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, vol. 26, no. 1, p. 289, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.11591/ijeecs.v26.i1.pp289-295.
[17] F. Ojeda, D. Mendez, A. Fajardo, and F. Ellinger, “On wireless sensor network models: a cross-layer systematic review,” Journal
of Sensor and Actuator Networks, vol. 12, no. 4, p. 50, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.3390/jsan12040050.
[18] P. Kumar, M. P. Singh, and U. Triar, “A review of routing protocols in wireless sensor network,” International Journal of
Engineering Research and Technology, vol. 1, no. 4, 2012.
[19] W. R. Heinzelman, A. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan, “Energy-efficient communication protocol for wireless microsensor
networks,” in Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, vol. 1, p. 10, 2000, doi:
10.1109/HICSS.2000.926982.
[20] M. B. Yassein, A. Al-Zou’bi, Y. Khamayseh, and W. Mardini, “Improvement on LEACH protocol of wireless sensor network
(VLEACH),” International Journal of Digital Content: Technology and its Applications, vol. 3, no. 2, 2009, doi:
10.4156/[Link].
[21] M. J. Handy, M. Haase, and D. Timmermann, “Low energy adaptive clustering hierarchy with deterministic cluster-head selection,”
in 4th International Workshop on Mobile and Wireless Communications Network, pp. 368–372. doi: 10.1109/MWCN.2002.1045790.
[22] A. Hnini, A. Ezzati, M. Fihri, and A. Hajami, “Time slots investment of a dead node in LEACH protocol on wireless sensor network,”
International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, vol. 4, no. 2, 2014, doi: 10.14569/specialissue.2014.040202.
[23] I. Mohammad, “A survey on leach protocol and its enhanced version,” International Journal of Computer Applications, vol. 182,
no. 13, pp. 26–33, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.5120/ijca2018917767.
[24] W. B. Heinzelman, A. P. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan, “An application-specific protocol architecture for wireless microsensor
networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 660–670, Oct. 2002, doi: 10.1109/TWC.2002.804190.
[25] R. S. M. Alyousuf, “Analysis and comparison on algorithmic functions of LEACH protocol in wireless sensor networks [WSN],”
in 2020 Third International Conference on Smart Systems and Inventive Technology (ICSSIT), Aug. 2020, pp. 1349–1355. doi:
10.1109/ICSSIT48917.2020.9214149.
[26] M. Tong and M. Tang, “LEACH-B: An improved LEACH protocol for wireless sensor network,” in 2010 International
Conference on Computational Intelligence and Software Engineering, Sep. 2010, pp. 1–4. doi: 10.1109/WICOM.2010.5601113.
[27] M. Malik, Y. Singh, and A. Arora, “Analysis of LEACH protocol in wireless sensor networks,” International Journal of
Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 178–183, 2013.
[28] R. Gantassi, A. Ben Yagouta, and B. Ben Gouissem, “Improvement of the LEACH protocol in load balancing and energy-
association conservation,” in 2017 International Conference on Internet of Things, Embedded Systems and Communications
(IINTEC), Oct. 2017, pp. 53–59. doi: 10.1109/IINTEC.2017.8325913.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Shireen Bashar Ghanem was born in 1996 in Ninevah, Iraq. She earned her
[Link]. in Electronic Engineering from the College of Electronics Engineering at Nineveh
University, Mosul, Iraq. Currently, she is pursuing an [Link]. in same department. Her research
focuses on smart energy management systems for wireless sensor networks, optimizing energy
efficiency and network sustainability. Her paper, titled Prolong the Lifetime of Wireless
Sensor Network by LEACH Protocol, has been accepted for presentation at the International
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Metaverse, and Cybersecurity (ICAMAC 2024). She
can be contacted at email: shereen.ghanem2014@[Link].

Aws Zuheer Yonis graduated from Department of Computer Engineering in

2003 and completed his Master's and Ph.D. degree in Electrical and Electronics-
Telecommunication Engineering at University Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM) in 2011,
2013 respectively. Since 2006 he became an engineer at University of Mosul-Iraq. While he
gets in 2020 an Assistant Professor degree in the Department of Electronic
Engineering/College of Electronics Engineering at Ninevah University, Mosul, Iraq. He has
published many research papers in international journals, books, and conferences. He can be
contacted at email: [Link]@[Link].

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1939-1948