# A PSO-Based Uneven Dynamic Clustering Multi-Hop Routing Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks
## 6 Simulation and Results

Table 2: The average rounds of PUDCRP in the 400 m \(\times\) 400 m network area (n = 200). respectively. The standard deviation of residual energy of nodes in PUDCRP is 18.82%, 41.37%, 10.99%, 5.14%, 14.22% and 12.57% lower than the other six algorithms, respectively. (a)-(g) in Figure 15 are the residual energy of nodes in the 500 th round in UCCGRA, multi-hop EEBCDA, EEMRP, CAMP, PSO-ECHS, PSO-SD and PUDCRP, respectively. Figure 15 visually indicates that the minimum residual energy of nodes in PUDCRP is more than 0.1 J. The minimum residual energy of nodes in other six algorithms are all less than 0.05 J. It shows that the energy consumption per node in PUDCRP is less than other algorithms. And it can be seen from Figure 15 that the energy histogram of the nodes in PUDCRP is denser than other six algorithms, which shows the balanced energy consumption of PUDCRP. The results from Table 3 and Figure 15 show that P  
The simulation experiments also compare the number of surviving nodes and energy consumption of the seven protocols in each round in network. The results are shown in Figures 16 and 17. Figure 16 shows how the number of surviving nodes of the seven routing protocols varies with the number of operation rounds in 400 m \(\times\) 400 m networks. It can be seen that the number of surviving nodes of PUDCRP begins to decrease later than the other six protocols and the round when the first dead node occurs is significantly delayed. The number of surviving nodes in PUDCRP decreases more slowly than the other six protocols. The results mean that PUDCRP balances the energy consumption of the sensor nodes more effectively than the other protocols. Figure 17 shows how the energy consumption of the seven routing protocols in each round varies. The PUDCRP protocol consumes less energy than the other protocols per round. It can be concluded that compared with other six protocols, the PUDCRP can significantly reduce the energy consumption of nodes. Figure 16: The number of surviving nodes in the 400 m \(\times\) 400 m network area. Figure 17: Energy consumption of the 400 m \(\times\) 400 m network area. Figure 18 shows the total number of packets received by the BS of the seven routing protocols. With increasing simulation rounds, the number of packets received by the BS is different in these protocols. In the PUDCRP algorithm, the BS receives far more data packets than EEMRP and other algorithms with the same rounds. In the 400 m \(\times\) 400 m network, packets sent to the BS in PUDCRP are saturated at 1200 th round and the BS has received 88,820 packets. However, EEMRP is saturated at 1200 th round and the BS has only received 53,960 packets. The experimental results show that due to the longer network lifetime and the more balanced energy consumption, the number of packets received by the BS in PUDCRP is much higher than that of the other six protocols. The number of packets received by UCCGRA and PUDCRP during the network operation period is similar, but since the network lifetime of PUDCRP is longer than UCCGRA, PUDCRP receives more packets than UCCGRA. Balanced energy consumption delays the death of the nodes, which ensures that the number of packets received by the BS remains high for a long time. Therefore, our algorithm has a significant improvement in the data transmission performance and interactive capabilities. It also shows that under the same experimental conditions, PUDCRP can collect more data and have higher network energy efficiency. We also compared the scalability of the network nodes number and network areas of the seven protocols, the LNDs of UCCGRA, multi-hop EEBCDA, EEMRP, CAMP, PSO-ECHS, PSO-SD and PUDCRP were tested in the 200 m \(\times\) 200 m and 400 m \(\times\) 400 m network environments with different number of nodes, respectively. Figure 19 shows the LNDs of the seven protocols in 400 m \(\times\) 400 m networks with different number of nodes. Table 4 shows specific measurement data of LNDs of the seven protocols in 400 m \(\times\) 400 m networks with different number of nodes.