# Wireless Sensor Network Energy Model and Its Use in the Optimization of Routing Protocols
## 1 Introduction
Each quadrant contains two clustering, which would be like the master nodes, and other nodes transmit data with two hops data transmission. Another similar protocol is Position Responsive Routing Protocol (PRRP), which is more energy efficient. This protocol makes a choice of the cluster head based on distance from the sink, energy level, and the average distance of neighboring nodes from the candidate master node. PRRP is similar to the LEACH protocol in which any node can communicate with the sump and the data transmission mechanism is the time-based schedule. In PRRP, the number of nodes of the branches of the hierarchical tree and the distance from the non-leaf node is smaller compared to LEACH and CELRP. This makes energy conservation candidate for optimization [11]. The PRRP protocol dramatically increases data transfer and provides a better solution to the routing problem focused on energy efficiency, due to the efficient selection and distribution of gateways. Another important protocol to mention is the Energy-Efficient data Routing Protocol (EERP) for WSN [12], which selects a set of good roads, and chooses the one based on the node state and the road cost function. In EERP, each node has several neighbors through which packets can be routed to the base station. A node bases its routing decision on two metrics: status and cost function. In this study, AODV, DSR, ZTR, LEACH, and PEGASIS are quantitatively compared and assessed based on several efficiency metrics that analyze how these routing protocols optimize energy through various schemes in order to find the best routes in the shortest possible time. As the hierarchy algorithms, such as the ZTR, denote simple and fast routing that reduce network overloads, they are reliable and have a distributed addressing scheme that only permits neighbor tables, not long, and elaborated routing tables. The performance of WSN is closely related to that of the routing protocol, because routes can vary dynamically over time. Energy-aware protocols such as LEACH and PEGASIS seek to increase the lifetime of the network. They propose to find sub-optimal paths to allow a more equitable distribution of the network's energy consumption. Hierarchical protocols such as ZTR and MPH have advantages in terms of scalability and efficiency in communications. Particularly for WSN, nodes with higher energy can be used to process and send information, while those with lower energy are used to monitor the environment and send the information to the node with greater energy capacity. Finally, proactive type protocols, which establish routes before there is a real traffic demand, are suitable for real-time traffic, since they have low latency; however, they waste bandwidth due to periodic updates and they are not energy efficient. The MPH protocol is a hybrid protocol, i.e., it is a combination of reactive and proactive nature protocols. The AODV and DSR protocols are two protocols widely recognized in WSN for their rationality and the ZTR protocol is a proactive protocol par excellence. Therefore, we believe that the comparison between protocols of natures of the same type is relevant. In addition, we wanted to complement our study with energy-aware protocols because the main objective of this work is to demonstrate and analyze the higher energy costs in the sensors, according to the type of tasks they perform on the network. This paper proposes a simple energy model, which quickly shows changes in the network performance, its implementation is simple, and it does not represent higher processing consumption. In the WSN literature, there are few energy models [13; 14] and some energy-aware protocols that seek to optimize the energy of networks. The need for an energy model that impacts the performance metrics of a network is an advantage that not all models exhibit.