Requirements and current solutions of wireless communication in industrial automation

Abstract

The industrial wireless automation sector exhibits a huge market growth in the last years. Today, many appli-cations already use wireless technologies. However, the existing wireless solutions do not yet offer sufficient performance with respect to real-time and reliability requirements, particularly for closed-loop control applications. As a result, low latency wireless communication technologies will bridge the gap and can become a key factor for the wide-spread penetration of wireless in industrial communication systems. It is therefore the main goal of this paper to provide a comprehensive overview on requirements, current solutions, and challenges as well as opportunities for future wireless industrial systems. Thereby, presented requirement figures, analysis results, and performance evaluations are based on numerous practical examples from industry.

Full text

Requirements and current solutions of wireless
communication in industrial automation
Andreas Frotzscher∗, Ulf Wetzker∗, Matthias Bauer†, Markus Rentschler‡, Matthias Beyer‡, Stefan Elspass§
and Henrik Klessig∗∗
∗Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Circuits IIS, Design Automation Division EAS, Dresden, Germany
Email: {andreas.frotzscher, ulf.wetzker}@eas.iis.fraunhofer.de
†Bosch Rexroth AG, Lohr am Main, Germany, Email: Matthias.Bauer3@boschrexroth.de
‡Balluff GmbH, Email: {Markus.Rentschler, Matthias.Beyer}@balluff.de
§Terex Material Handling, Email: stefan.elspass@terex.com
∗∗Vodafone Chair Mobile Communications Systems, Technische Universit¨
at Dresden, Email: henrik.klessig@tu-dresden.de
Abstract—The industrial wireless automation sector exhibits
a huge market growth in the last years. Today, many appli-
cations already use wireless technologies. However, the existing
wireless solutions do not yet offer sufficient performance with
respect to real-time and reliability requirements, particularly
for closed-loop control applications. As a result, low latency
wireless communication technologies will bridge the gap and
can become a key factor for the wide-spread penetration of
wireless in industrial communication systems. It is therefore the
main goal of this paper to provide a comprehensive overview
on requirements, current solutions, and challenges as well as
opportunities for future wireless industrial systems. Thereby,
presented requirement figures, analysis results, and performance
evaluations are based on numerous practical examples from
industry.
I. INT ROD UC TI ON A ND MOT IVATIO N
Wireless communication systems are employed in industrial
automation applications (IAA) for already more than ten years.
The industrial automation is sub-divided into the process
automation (e.g. chemical industry) and discrete factory au-
tomation (e.g. assembly line production). Typical application
fields of wireless systems in both areas are the connection
of movable machine parts or mobile machines integrated in
distributed control systems. Furthermore, wireless networks
are increasingly used for connecting machine parts or ma-
chines in difficult or dangerous environments, e.g. large dis-
tances or explosive areas. In the past and still nowadays, the
connection of movable machine parts are realized by trailing
cable systems, slip rings or sliding contacts. These solutions
lack from high installation and maintenance costs, wear and
thus lower reliability. In contrast to wired communication
systems, wireless systems cause very low installation cost.
Therefore, they are suited for connecting machine parts being
subsequently installed during modernization processes.
Initially wireless systems are used almost only in monitoring
and open-loop control applications at all different layers of the
automation pyramid [1]. In the last years, they are increasingly
considered for closed-loop control applications, especially in
the factory automation sector, e.g. screen process machines,
packaging machines and filling stations. The major challenge
for currently employed wireless systems are the high require-
ments of IAA regarding latency, synchronism and reliability.
This has delayed the market penetration of wireless systems
in the industrial automation sector.
Wide Area Network (WAN)
GSM/(E)GPRS
Field Level (LAN)
WLAN
IEEE 802.11a/b/g
Sensor Level
Wireless Hart (PA) ISA 100.11a(PA)
IEEE 802.15.4
WSAN, IEE802.15.1 (FA)
PA Process Automation
FA Factory Automation
Sensor Wireless FA Sensors Wireless PA Sensors
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) Gateway
HMI
HMI
SPS EGPRS Router
WLAN
Industrial WLAN Industrial Ethernet
Industrial Ethernet
Industrial WLAN
SPS
WiFi
Wireless Hart
)
ISA
Bluetooth
Fig. 1. Industrial Wireless Systems
Due to cost reasons and market acceptance, component
providers of industrial wireless communication systems in
the factory automation use typically existing WLAN and
Bluetooth conform standard transceiver components and partly
add proprietary protocol extensions, e.g. the IWLAN system
of Siemens [2] and the WISA system of ABB [3]. In 2012,
the PROFIBUS and PROFINET user organization (PNO)
published the WSAN-FA standard [4], basing on WISA. In
the process automation, the standards WirelessHART and ISA
100.11a were developed by the HART communication founda-
tion and the international society of automation (ISA), respec-
tively. The PNO adopted WirelessHART for the WSAN-PA
standard. In some industrial applications the Digital Enhanced
Cordless Telephone (DECT) technology is used. Due to its
deterministic medium access, it is getting more attention in the
last years [5]. Radio frequency identification (RFID) systems
are used in the industrial automation in several areas, e.g.
transport, logistic, material handling, asset management and
product tracking. However, as typical RFID applications do not
require very short end-to-end latency values, they are beyond
the scope of this paper. Cellular communication systems are
employed in IAA almost only in remote service applications or
alert systems [6]. Thus, current industrial automation applica-
tions utilize preferably wireless technologies operating in the
ICC'14 - W8: Workshop on 5G Technologies
978-1-4799-4640-2/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE 67

ISM frequency bands 2.4GHz and 5GHz. Since the wireless
technologies described above are not appropriate for all control
applications, some system integrators developed proprietary
wireless systems operating in the ISM bands. Figure 1 gives
an overview of the different wireless technologies and their
application fields in the industrial automation.
Due to the increasing use of wireless technologies in indus-
trial automation applications, several organizations developed
guidelines for the installation, deployment and maintenance of
such systems, e.g. the German Electrical and Electronic Man-
ufacturers’ Association (ZVEI) [7], the Association of German
Engineers (VDI) [8] or the International User Association for
Automation in Process Industries (NAMUR) [9]–[11].
In this paper a comprehensive overview on requirements,
current solutions, and challenges as well as opportunities of
future wireless industrial systems are given. The outline of the
paper is as follows. The next section details the requirements
of industrial automation applications on communication sys-
tems and introduces the relevant key parameters. Furthermore
example values of these parameters for different applications
are given. Section III presents some examples of existing
applications of wireless technologies in industrial automation
and introduces the coexistence problem of wireless networks
operating in the ISM bands. Furthermore, existing solution
approaches for the coexistence issue are presented. In Sec.
IV the requirements of industrial automation applications on
future wireless are summarized. Finally, Sec. V concludes this
contribution.
II. REQUIREMENTS OF INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS
The currently defined application profiles for wireless au-
tomation [8], [12] do not consider closed-loop control appli-
cations, a class of field level applications which put outermost
challenges on the real-time behavior of their associated com-
munication system. This gap is addressed in the following.
A. Real-Time Characteristics
When classifying industrial applications with respect to
their real-time characteristics, most applications in process
automation are representatives of the class of soft real-time.
Otherwise, closed-loop control applications belong to the class
of hard real-time, i.e. given temporal deadlines have to be
strictly met, or isochronous real-time, i.e. hard real-time plus
additional constraints on the jitter [13]. Thereby, closed-loop
control algorithms are executed cyclically. The period of a
control cycle is referred to as cycle time Tcyc, which is a
characteristic measure in industrial automation determining
performance and accuracy of the given application. The timing
parameters related to a control cycle are illustrated in Fig. 2(a).
First of all, the application’s control algorithm in the master
computes a set of command values. Next, the master transmits
these command values to slave nand finally waits for recep-
tion of actual values from slave nat response time Tre,n,
where the response time corresponds to the round trip delay.
Here, the application’s real-time requirement is satisfied if
Tcyc −Tre,n >∆p∀n∈[1, N ](1)
with ∆pdenoting the processing time of the master’s control
algorithm. Accordingly, slave nreceives command values
from the master after transmission delay Dc,n. Slave nhas
to apply its command values at valid time Tvwhich requires
Tv−Dc,n >∆v∀n∈[1, N ],(2)
where ∆vdesignates some margin for slave nto prepare for
applying its command values. Then, slave nsenses its newly
applied command values after settling time Taand transmits
these actual values back to the master with transmission
delay Da,n.
Master Slave n
Dc,n
Da,n
Tv
Tcyc Tre,n
(a)
Ta
Application
Master Slave n
Application
(b)
{L, Tcyc, Tv, PLR, J}
Communication
system
Communication
system
logical
connections
set of
requirements
Channel
Fig. 2. Industrial control application: (a) control cycle and timing parameters,
(b) system model and set of requirements.
Further on, it is crucial that all Nslaves apply their com-
mand values isochronously at valid time Tv, which requires a
common time base for all Nslaves. For that purpose, state of
the art fieldbus systems incorporate dedicated synchronization
mechanisms [14] to bound the instantaneous jitter Tj,n of
slave n’s valid time estimate ˆ
Tv,n to an application specific
threshold J
|ˆ
Tv,n −Tv|=Tj,n < J ∀n∈[1, N ].(3)
In this context, the property of a communication system to
provide accurate time instants on a common time base (cf.
eq. (3)) is referred to as synchronism. Otherwise, the term
determinism corresponds to the capability of a system to
provide guaranteed upper-bounded deadlines for response time
(cf. eq. (1)) and transmission delay (cf. eq. (2)) [8].
B. Application and Communication Parameters
Figure 2(b) sketches the cyclic data processing model of
an industrial application together with its basic parameters.
Thereby, an application consists of a master device and
Nslaves typically arranged in logical star topology. Formally,
the master sets up logical connections to each slave n∈[1, N]
on application level. More precisely, each slave nis assigned
two logical connections, one as the consumer of command
values from the master and another one as the producer of
actual values to the master. Each logical connection is associ-
ated with a parameter set {L, Tcyc , Tv, P LR, J}with payload
L, cycle time Tcyc, valid time Tv, packet loss rate P LR, and
threshold Jfor the jitter.
Table I enumerates characteristic use cases of field level
applications. Both the requirements of profile manufacturing
cell [12], which comprises e.g. the control of robot arms,
and of profile sensor-actuator [3] are fulfilled with state of
the art narrowband wireless systems, i.e. Bluetooth, WISA
ICC'14 - W8: Workshop on 5G Technologies
68

TABLE I
PARA MET ER S OF EX AM PLE FI EL D LEV EL AP PL ICAT ION S
Example N L Tcyc TvJ
[Byte] [ms] [ms] [µs]
Manufacturing cell [12] 30 <16 50 5 500
Sensor-actuator [3] 120 <20 n.s. 15 n.s.
Closed-loop control [15] high low n.s. 1 20
- Machine Tools 20 50 0.5 0.25 1
- Printing Machines 50 30 2 1 5
- Packaging Machines 30 15 5 2.5 20
or WSAN-FA, respectively. In contrast, closed-loop control
applications [15] require shorter transmission delays as well
as higher data rates. Here, throughput, data rate and system
capacity of a communication system can be derived from cycle
time Tcyc and payload L, which differ significantly between
use cases. For instance, printing machines with their motion
control applications nowadays almost fully exploit the system
capacity of Fast-Ethernet based wired fieldbus systems while
higher cycle times of simple sensor-actuator networks result in
moderate data rates and relaxed duty cycles. Note that all given
use cases of Tab. I require packet loss rates P LR < 10−9
on application level, which is mandatory for field level ap-
plications in factory automation. Therefore, besides real-time
requirements the transmission reliability represents a second
major challenge for wireless industrial communication systems
(cf. Sec. III-C).
Closed-loop control applications on the field level are
executed by machines, each of which consists of a master
control unit and a set of slaves. Thereby, a machine is
typically build up of locally fixed slaves distributed around
some tens of meters from the master, e.g. electric drives in
a printing press or most numerical control applications of
machine tools. However, dedicated machines, e.g. in packaging
technologies, do contain moving machine components, in
particular continuously rotating parts with angular velocities
of around 100 rpm. Complex moving components quickly
demand sophisticated and maintenance intensive connecting
techniques (cf. Sec. I). Moreover, factory halls consist of
a multitude of machines. Thus, using wireless technology
for intra-machine communication requires an explicit network
and frequency planning combined with carefully organized
medium access mechanisms to avoid blocking conditions in
the available system bandwidth. In this context, the term
availability refers to the ability of a communication system to
accomplish a dedicated data transmission regardless of channel
conditions and unintended or interfering data traffic [8].
III. STATE-OF-THE-ART SOLU TI ON S
A. Existing wireless automation applications
Magnetic induction and nearfield communication: For ap-
plications in a deterministic moving environment, for example
along a stationary track or when modules need to be quickly
disconnected and reliably reconnected, i.e. tool heads in robot
cells, inductive coupling for non-contact power transmission
and data transfer is a very beneficial wireless solution, that can
replace traditional slip rings, sliding contacts etc. and thus can
solve many application problems. Inductive coupling allows
transmission of power and signals over an air gap of typically
up to 15 mm, depending on the diameter of the coils. The
power transmission can reach up to 50 W in sensor actuator
applications. The technology uses a magnetic alternating field
in the range of 20 to 200 kHz, which is generated by a
transmitter coil and induces energy into a receiver coil. Due
to the huge wavelength compared to the size of the coils,
coexistence problems with other systems can hardly occur. The
transmission of low data rates is realized by load modulation
on the coil current. For higher data rates, usually a second pair
of coils with higher resonance frequency is utilized. The signal
delay is very low and stable, some systems achieve 1ms.
Directed antennas and waveguides: Except for automated
guided vehicles many moving machine components on the
field level are often characterized by their well-known trajec-
tory, i.e. network nodes propagate along fixed routes described
by rotary tables, sliding carriages or robot arms. This in
turn enables the use of application specific antenna solutions
(e.g. waveguides or directed antennas) with reduced transmit
powers to limit the signal propagation of wireless networks.
Safety-Application via WLAN: Safety related applications
can be fast motion control, emergency-stop or a electric
overhead traveling crane application as described in [16].
These applications define short safety reaction times to prevent
physical damage to humans or material. Since standard wired
or wireless data transmission channels cannot be developed
according to safety regulation procedures of IEC 61508, the
so-called black-channel principle [17] must be utilized. This
means, that the transmission channel is generally regarded as
unsafe and must be supervised by a mechanism, developed
according to the procedures of IEC 61508.
This supervision mechanism is a usually a so-called safety
protocol, e.g ProfiSafe, CIPSafety, OpenSafety, CANOpen
Safety. The protocol checks constantly the already mentioned
performance parameters of the transmission channel such as
latency, synchronicity and reliability in form of packet loss
and correct sequence numbering. If one of these performance
rules is violated, the safety protocol detects it and switches the
safety application into an unsafe or fail-safe state. However,
when this happens, the availability of the application gets
degraded. That means, when the transmission channel is
unreliable, the safety application has a bad availability. In case
of a standard wireless system such as IEEE 802.11 and short
cycle times, the transmission reliability can quickly degrade to
a point unsuitable for operation of safety applications. Special
wireless transmission systems like WSAN-FA or Parallel Re-
dundant WLAN [17], [18] are required for such applications.
B. Coexistence in ISM bands
As discussed above, IAA’s typically employ wideband com-
munication technologies operating in the 2.4GHz and 5GHz
ISM bands, because of the worldwide permitted unlicensed
operation. However, operators of wireless systems have no
regulatory protection against interference by other wireless
ICC'14 - W8: Workshop on 5G Technologies
69

systems using the same frequency band. Since no central
medium access control is available, all wireless nodes compete
for using the spectral resource. The coexistence of several spa-
tial dense located wireless systems using the same frequency
band will introduce interference and can lead to decreased
quality of service (QoS) and severe packet loss [19], [20].
The European Telecommunications Standards Institute
(ETSI) published several norms, specifying medium access
mechanisms to be used by wireless technologies within these
frequency bands. The EN 300 328 V1.8.1 norm [21] applies to
wireless wideband technologies operating within the 2.4GHz
ISM band with a maximum transmit power between 10 dBm
and 100 dBm (equivalent isotropically radiated power). This
includes frequency hopping spread spectrum (FHSS) and all
other spread spectrum techniques, e.g. direct sequence spread
spectrum (DSSS) and orthogonal frequency division duplex
(OFDM). In compliance with this norm, each wireless device
must perform either a clear channel assessment (CCA) check
before each transmission, i.e. it has to sense by energy
detection if the channel is free, or other types of Detect and
Avoid (DAA) mechanisms. Although the DAA techniques im-
prove the coexistence between competing wireless nodes and
networks, packet collisions can still occur, especially in case
of the hidden-node scenarios. Furthermore, wireless networks
employing the CCA procedure suffer from a significant latency
offset due to the medium sensing and a low determinism due
to the medium congestion. These two facts are significant
limitations for closed-loop control applications in the discrete
factory automation, demanding for data transmissions with low
latency and high determinism.
In order to improve the determinism of wireless wideband
networks in the ISM bands, the ZVEI and the VDI developed
guidelines for the installation, configuration and maintenance
of wireless networks in industrial automation applications to
alleviate the coexistence problem [22], [23]. The guidelines
aim at a central frequency planning by a cell based exclusive
frequency channel allocation to non-FHSS wireless network.
Since industrial automation applications are characterized by
a large number of spatially dense located control systems
(sensor, actors and controllers) communicating typically by
small datagram sizes, the exclusive channel allocation to each
wireless interconnected control system yields an inefficient
spectrum usage. This limits significantly the achievable num-
ber of coexisting wireless networks within a specific produc-
tion site.
Another problem of wireless technologies using the ISM
bands occurs when a new wireless interconnected control sys-
tem shall be installed in a production environment with already
existing wireless infrastructure. The coexistence between the
new wireless network and existing wireless infrastructure is
not known a-priori. The work in [24] presents an approach
for analyzing the coexistence between the networks in a test
environment before installing the new wireless interconnected
control system in the production site. The approach bases on
emulating the existing wireless network of the production site
in the test environment.
In order to give an insight into the performance of some
wireless systems used in the discrete factory automation, the
communication parameters of WLAN, Bluetooth, WSAN-FA
and accordingly WISA are summarized in Tab. II. Since con-
sistent practical data cannot be found in the literature, typical
values of selected papers are summarized for comparison. In
case specific values cannot be guaranteed by the wireless
technology, estimations are given in parentheses. Table II
shows clearly, that WLAN provides very high data rates but
can only support significantly large cycle times due to the CCA
procedure. In contrast to this, Bluetooth achieves the shortest
cycle times due to the TDMA medium access, but it offers
only a very limited number of nodes per network. WSAN-
FA supports a very low cycle time and a very high number
of nodes per network, but can achieve only a low data rate.
As a consequence, the discussed wireless technologies pose
significant limitations for closed-loop control applications with
very challenging requirements as listed in Tab. I.
TABLE II
COMPARISON OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES IN
DI SCR ETE FA CTO RY AUTO MATI ON
Name WLAN Bluetooth WSAN-FA and
[25], [26] [27] WISA [3], [28]
max. gross system 600 Mbps 3Mbps 1Mbps
data rate
network topology star star star
nodes per network (50) 7 120
min. cycle time Tcyc (100 ms) 8.75 ms 10 ms
C. Current Solutions
As discussed before, performance requirements for indus-
trial automation applications are closely related to low trans-
mission latency, strong determinism, reliability and, in the
case of wireless mobility, seamless handover. But wireless
communication in the ISM bands generally depends on a
shared medium and has to coexist with other stations regarding
medium access. For improving wireless determinism in a
non-stochastic manner, measures in the time domain can be
applied, such as centrally coordinated medium access like
IEEE 802.11s Point Coordination Function (PCF) or Time
Division Multiple Access (TDMA).
WSAN-FA: One example is the Wireless Sensor Actuator
Network for Factory Automation (WSAN-FA) [4]. Similar
to WISA, WSAN-FA utilizes the PHY-Layer of Bluetooth
(IEEE 802.15.1) and provides improved synchronization by
Frequency Hopping Multiple Access, which is a combination
of TDMA and Frequency Hopping, but often imprecisely
referred to as FHSS. This system is especially designed for
the need of factory automation on sensor actuator level and
uses the data format according to the IO-Link standard [29].
WSAN-FA is able to address 120 subscribers in a wire-
less star topology within a cycle time Tcyc = 2.4ms. To
achieve a high reliability, four retransmissions on different
frequencies are performed, which yields a system cycle time
of Tcyc = 10 ms. WSAN-FA provides blacklisting to exclude
channels from frequency hopping to enable coexistence with
ICC'14 - W8: Workshop on 5G Technologies
70

Fig. 3. System structure of WSAN-FA
other systems. It is even possible to use all 3 WLAN channels
in the 2.4GHz band and one WSAN system in the gaps in
between [30].
Currently, WSAN-FA is the only open standard optimized
for the requirements of the sensor actuator level and seems
to come close to the performance requirements for closed-
loop applications. Beyond this, WSAN-FA has still some
optimization potential regarding performance characteristics.
WLAN: IEEE 802.11 defines the Distributed Coordination
Function (DCF) and Point Coordination Function (PCF) for
managing the medium access within the networks. With DCF,
all stations of a network compete equally for the medium
access using the CSMA/CA mechanism and a random back-
off timer. With PCF, all stations use the CSMA/CA technique
as well, but the Access Point (AP) coordinates the medium
access of its own client stations. The resulting polling scheme
is intended for transmission of real-time traffic as well as
for asynchronous data traffic. However, so far no component
provider has implemented the PCF mechanism in real products
except for Siemens with its proprietary form IPCF [2].
Other improvement approaches are based on diversity,
which is basically the redundant transmission of information
over uncorrelated channels or resources [31]. MIMO tech-
nologies, as implemented in WiMAX, HSPA+, LTE and IEEE
802.11n utilize spatial multiplexing by space-time coding and
signal transmission over several antennas to achieve both
coding gain and diversity gain.
Instead or in combination to such pre-detection combining
approaches, one can also utilize post-detection combining
methods in the higher layers of the information processing
chain of the communication system, yielding specific gains
especially in packet transmission schemes [32]. A recently
presented example is Parallel Redundant WLAN (see Fig.
4), which utilizes the Parallel Redundancy Protocol (PRP)
according to IEC 62439-3 on the Ethernet level and yields
significant improvements [17]. Such a parallel redundancy
strategy could also be employed to improve other wireless
systems, such as WSAN-FA.
Fig. 4. Parallel Redundant WLAN system with PRP
IV. REQ UI RE ME NT S ON F UT UR E WI RE LE SS
COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS
The solutions described in the previous section offer some
improvement for the transmission latency and reliability. How-
ever, the challenging requirements set by closed-loop control
applications in the discrete factory automation can not be
reached. In order to address this application type, future wire-
less communication systems must fulfill several requirements,
which are explained in the following.
As stated in Tab. I closed-loop control applications require
a very low transmission latency of less than 1ms at a very
low jitter of a few microseconds, a high degree of synchro-
nism and high availability in time and space. These points
might be achieved by a central coordinated medium access in
combination with a local network planning and management.
Furthermore, a high reliability (packet error rate <10−9) is
mandatory, to minimize the retransmission of packets. The
packet overhead should be kept very small to ensure a tolerable
spectral efficiency with small packet payloads. In order to
address the multitude of industrial automation applications
(e.g. closed-loop control, open-loop control or monitoring
applications), different QoS classes should be supported with
different requirements regarding cycle time, latency, jitter,
packet payload.
The use of the unlicensed ISM bands is a significant
advantage in terms of costs, but it is also the main draw-
back of currently employed wireless systems in the industrial
automation, because of the coexistence problem. Thus, the
wireless automation sector will depend on the cost efficient
availability of frequency spectrum. This can be realized either
by using license-free frequency bands, dedicated only for
automation purposes, with robust wireless technology and a
local coordinated medium access or an automatic coexistence
management. Another possibility might be the use of licensed
frequency spectrum (e.g. mobile networks). However, this
sets several requirements on the network providers. First, the
providers must establish transparent, simple and cost efficient
billing models. Second, the network provider should install
specific small cells (e.g. pico cells) in the production site
for realizing the wireless communication on sensor actuator
level or above. These cells should only be accessible for the
addressed automation applications. Third, the sensor actuator
communication of the automation application should be decou-
pled from the core mobile communication network, to ensure
very low transmission latencies.
ICC'14 - W8: Workshop on 5G Technologies
71

V. CONCLUSION
The main goal of this paper was to illustrate the heterogene-
ity of the possible fields of application for wireless systems in
industrial automation accompanied by numerous examples.
Nowadays, state of the art wireless solutions already fit a
certain amount of industrial applications’ requirements, e.g. in
process automation, for sensor actuator networks, or generally
for upper levels in the automation pyramid. Typically, these
solutions are built up on proven consumer standards like
WLAN and Bluetooth and gradually enhanced by means of
MAC tuning to improve the determinism as well as diversity
schemes to increase reliability of data transmission. Further-
more, many industrial applications, in particular those imple-
menting closed-loop control algorithms on the field level of
discrete factory automation, require hard or isochronous real-
time with cycle times in the low milliseconds. Obviously, these
requirements cannot be served with current state of the art
wireless solutions. However, if low latency wireless solutions
could be provided many use cases with moving machine parts
would significantly benefit from wireless technologies and
thus, reducing cost, simplifying installation, and even enabling
new application opportunities.
Finally, besides technical means to mitigate the coexistence
problems in the ISM-bands which are recognized as the
bottleneck for a further increase use of wireless in automation,
the industrial community launched concerted actions to bundle
their collective interests. This primarily concerns the harmo-
nized ETSI EN 300 328 V1.8.1 norm as well as the efforts
for allocation of a dedicated spectrum for wireless industrial
automation. In a subsequent step, the industrial community
might consider new business models in collaboration with
network operators to facilitate the QoS required by industrial
automation applications.
REF ER EN CE S
[1] T. Sauter, S. Soucek, W. Kastner, and D. Dietrich, “The Evolution
of Factory and Building Automation,” IEEE Industrial Electronics
Magazine, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 35–48, 2011.
[2] Siemens AG. [Online]. Available: www.automation.siemens.com/
mcms/industrial-communication/en/industrial- wireless-communication/
network components/Pages/network-components-iwlan.aspx
[3] G. Scheible, D. Dzung, J. Endresen, and J.-E. Frey, “Unplugged But
Connected - Design and Implementation of a Truly Wireless Real-
Time Sensor/Actuator Interface,” IEEE Industrial Electronics Magazine,
vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 25–34, 2007.
[4] PNO, WSAN Air Interface Specification, PROFIBUS and PROFINET
International (PI), 2012, v 1.0.
[5] K. Das and P. Havinga, “Evaluation of DECT-ULE for Robust Com-
munication in Dense Wireless Sensor Networks,” in 3rd International
Conference on the Internet of Things, IOT 2012. IEEE Communications
Society, 2012, pp. 193–190.
[6] G. Boysen, Mobile Communications - Data transmission in industry.
Phoenix Contact GmbH, 2012, ISBN 978-3-00-037387-9.
[7] ZVEI, “Wireless Solutions in Automation,” 2011. [On-
line]. Available: http://www.zvei.org/Verband/Publikationen/Seiten/
ZVEI-Funkloesungen- Englisch.aspx
[8] Guideline VDI/VDE 2185 Part 1, Radio based communication in
industrial automation, The VDI/VDE Society for Measurement and
Automatic control, December 2009.
[9] Wireless Automation Requirements, NAMUR Std. NE124, September
2010.
[10] Wireless Sensor Networks: Requirements for the Convergence of existing
Standards, NAMUR Std. NE 133, August 2011.
[11] Engineering and Operation of Wireless Sensor Networks, NAMUR Std.
NA 137, July 2011.
[12] ETSI TR 102 889-2 V1.1.1 (2011-08), 2011.
[13] C. E. Pereira and P. Neumann, “Industrial Communication Protocols,”
in Handbook of Automation, 2009, pp. 981–999.
[14] G. Cena, I. Cibrario Bertolotti, S. Scanzio, A. Valenzano, and C. Zunino,
“Synchronize Your Watches: Part II: Special-Purpose Solutions for
Distributed Real-Time Control,” IEEE Industrial Electronics Magazine,
vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 27–39, 2013.
[15] BMBF, Announcement: Reliable Wireless Communications in
Industry, BMBF’s funding programme ”ICT 2020 - Research for
Innovations”, (German). [Online]. Available: http://www.bmbf.de/
foerderungen/22967.php
[16] L. Rauchhaupt and S. Elspass, “Coexistence considerations for wireless
CAN systems with safety-requirements,” in 14th international CAN
conference (iCC). Eurosites Republique, November 2013.
[17] M. Rentschler and P. Laukemann, “Towards a reliable parallel redundant
WLAN black channel,” in Factory Communication Systems (WFCS),
2012 9th IEEE International Workshop on, 2012, pp. 255–264.
[18] M. Kassis, O. Mady, H. Halawa, M. Rentschler, R. Daoud, H. Amer,
and H. ElSayed, “Analysis of parallel redundant WLAN with timing
diversity,” in Computer and Information Technology (WCCIT), 2013
World Congress on, 2013, pp. 1–6.
[19] D. Sexton, M. Mahony, M. Lapinski, and J. Werb, “Radio Channel
Quality in Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks,” in Sensors for Industry
Conference, 2005, 2005.
[20] N. LaSorte, S. Rajab, and H. Refai, “Experimental assessment of
wireless coexistence for 802.15.4 in the presence of 802.11g/n,” in Elec-
tromagnetic Compatibility (EMC), 2012 IEEE International Symposium
on, 2012.
[21] ETSI EN 300 328 V1.8.1 (2012 -04), ETSI, 2012.
[22] ZVEI, “Coexistence of Wireless Systems in Automation Technology,”
2009. [Online]. Available: http://www.zvei.org/Verband/Publikationen/
Seiten/Coexistence-of-Wireless-Systems-in- Automation-Technology.
aspx
[23] Guideline VDI/VDE 2185 Part 2, Radio based communication in Indus-
trial Automation - Management of the Coexistence of radio solutions,
The VDI/VDE Society for Measurement and Automatic control, De-
cember 2009.
[24] M. Ullmann, S. Hoener, A. Frotzscher, U. Wetzker, I. Splitt, and
M. Galetzka, “Emulation plattform for coexistence analysis in wireless
automation,” in European Microwave Conference 2013, October 2013.
[25] S. P. Karanam, H. Trsek, and J. Jasperneite, “Potential of the HCCA
scheme defined in IEEE802.11e for QoS enabled Industrial Wireless
Networks,” in Factory Communication Systems, 2006 IEEE Interna-
tional Workshop on, 2006, pp. 227–230.
[26] G. Cena, L. Seno, A. Valenzano, and C. Zunino, “On the Performance
of IEEE 802.11e Wireless Infrastructures for Soft-Real-Time Industrial
Applications,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 6, no. 3,
pp. 425 –437, aug. 2010.
[27] L. L. Bello and O. Mirabella, “Communication techniques and archi-
tectures for Bluetooth networks in industrial scenarios,” in Emerging
Technologies and Factory Automation, 2005. ETFA 2005. 10th IEEE
Conference on, vol. 1, 2005.
[28] J. Kjellsson, A. Vallestad, R. Steigmann, and D. Dzung, “Integration
of a Wireless I/O Interface for PROFIBUS and PROFINET for Factory
Automation,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 10, pp. 4279 –
4287, oct. 2009.
[29] IO-Link Consortium, IO-Link Interface and System specification, 2012,
v 1.1.2.
[30] PNO, Wireless Networks Coexistence in PROFINET Infrastructures,
PROFIBUS and PROFINET International (PI), 2009, v 1.0.
[31] D. G. Brennan, “Linear diversity combining techniques,” Proceedings
of the IEEE, vol. 91, no. 2, pp. 331–356, 2003.
[32] H. Beikirch, M. Vo, and A. Fink, “Redundancy approach to increase
the availability and reliability of radio communication in industrial
automation,” in IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory
Automation (ETFA), 2009, pp. 1–4.
ICC'14 - W8: Workshop on 5G Technologies
72