## 5 Proposed Dynamic Cluster Head Election Algorithm
### Proposed Dynamic Re-Clustering and Self-Organization Method
#### 5.2.2 Dead Nodes and Re-Clustering Organization
## 6 Performance Comparison and Results Analysis

The LEACH protocol is chosen to perform the comparison due to the considerable number of created protocols based on it, such as FBCFP [18] or FL-EEC/D [16]. In this paper, a Lightweight and Efficient Dynamic Cluster Head Election Routing Protocol (LEDCHE-WSN) has been proposed to enhance energy efficiency and extend network life for wireless sensor networks. This algorithm is comprised of two integrated methods: electing the optimum cluster head, and organizing the re-clustering process dynamically. The performance efficiency and precision of the proposed protocol assumptions are validated by using NetSim simulation, and compared with the LEACH and FBCFP protocols. The coming Sections introduce the simulation setup and analysis results. ### Simulation Setup

In the simulation setup, 100 sensor nodes are scattered uniformly in a 100 m \(\times\) 100 m region. The simulation study uses NetSim simulator. The proposed network has been divided into 5 clusters, and each cluster includes 20 nodes. Moreover, each cluster is connected to the corresponding sink node, therefore the number of SNs is also 5, and, in turn, all these SNs transmit their data to the main network station, which is called the \"Base Station\" (BS). The SN of each cluster is located at the center of the cluster, to aggregate data from all the sensor nodes effectively. Therefore, all nodes of the cluster can be connected with it using the single-hop model method. Besides that, sink nodes are distributed to make the network more scalable. Additionally, the BS is located at the center of each network. The BSs collect their data from rechargeable SNs. To be more specific, in the proposed protocol there are 5 SNs in a 100 \(\times\) 100 m network size, which means there is one SN in each 20 m \(\times\) m, each SN is at the center of their area, meaning the distance between the regular nodes and the SN is only approximately 10 m. Therefore, the nodes are not long-distance from the SN. Moreover, the BS is at the center of the 5 SNs, in the same way; the distances become closer. Hence, good architecture designing makes the connectivity more simple and flexible. Table 2 shows the network parameters and corresponding values. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Value** & **Parameter** \\ \hline
100 \(\times\) 100 m & Network size \\ \hline Sensor & Device Type \\ \hline
100 & Number of sensor nodes \\ \hline
1460 & MTU (bytes) \\ \hline DSR & WSNs Routing Protocols \\ \hline PHY IEEE802.15.4 & MAC Layer Protocol \\ \hline
512 bits & Control packet size \\ \hline
4000 bits & Data packet size \\ \hline
6 \(\mid\) = 6000 m J & Initial Energy \\ \hline
50 nj/bit & Select \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Network Simulation Parameters. ### Results Analysis

The proposed LEDCHE-WSN protocol is evaluated and compared with the LEACH and FBCFP protocols in terms of energy consumption, mean package delay, and total packets dropped (loss ratio). Additionally, it is compared with existing HEED and FLCFP performance in terms of network lifetime. The proposed algorithm is characterized by simplicity, ease, and lightness as it was pointed in the paper title. The computational complexity burden was avoided in the proposed algorithm compared with other protocols. Most of the previous studies, including the FBCFP and LEACH protocols, adopted a heavy measuring method in choosing the optimum cluster head, such as measuring the signal strength, residual energy, node density, hop count, and the distance among nodes and base station which causes delays, increasing loss ratio, and draining the network energy that is supposed to be provided. More precisely, the FBCFP protocol makes extensive calculations in the cluster head election process, such as node density, CH degree count, traffic level, and bandwidth availability.