2017 Australian and New Zealand Control Conference (ANZCC)

December 17-20, 2017. Gold Coast Convention Centre, Australia

Coexistence for Industrial Wireless Communication Systems in the

Context of Industrie 4.0
Darina Schulze1 , Lutz Rauchhaupt1 , Ulrich Jumar1

Abstract— Several wireless communication systems operating

in parallel are typical for industrial applications. These systems
2
have to be coexistent to ensure, that every application commu- W D2
nication requirement is fulfilled. Ensuring this coexistence is
called coexistence management. We want to develop an auto- 3
W D2 1
mated coexistence management with control engineering con-
W D3
siderations, which is not considered in current approaches yet.
In this contribution we investigate the nominal (interference-
free) plant model with several wireless communication systems.
1
We use timed Petri-net approaches in max-plus algebra for
W D2
modelling the time behaviour of message transmissions. We 1 3
W D1 W D1
parametrize this model with real measurements in a 2.4 GHz
frequency spectrum within a WiFi test environment according 2
W D1
to a predefined test case scenario.

I. I NTRODUCTION Fig. 1. Exemplary field of consideration, compare to [3]

The use of wireless communication for industrial produc-
tion and logistic processes will rapidly grow in the next few
years. According to several application communication re-
quirements, heterogeneous types of wireless communication
systems (W CS) are going to be implemented in production
facilities. Heterogeneous means, that different technologies
(e.g. Bluetooth, WiFi, WISA or ZigBee) and different fre-
quency bands (e.g. 1900 MHz, 2400 MHz, 5800 MHz) are
used. If several W CS are using the same transmission
medium in the same time domain, the same frequency domain
and at the same location domain, message transmission may
be interfered, compare to [1]. In such a case, the coexistence
between W CS could be lost. Wireless coexistence is a state
in which every W CS fulfils all their application commu-
nication requirements in the facility hall [2]. Coexistence
management process is a measure to hold the coexistence
and to minimise interferences between several W CS. In our
research area we are focussing on an automated coexistence
management process with control engineering considera-
tions. The objective is based on using a control to ensure
coexistence. For the optimal development of such algorithms
we developed a description of the field of consideration for
wireless coexistence management, compare to [3]. In figure
(fig.) 1 key terms are introduced. The W CS are subject
of coexistence management according to interferences. A
W CS consists of at least two wireless devices (W D). In
Fig. 1 W D with the same number form one W CS. A W D
can be source S (producer) or target T (consumer) of a
message. This assigns its role in a logical link l between
two logical end points of an automation application. For
message transmissions of a logical link, a physical link pl has
to be established. In W CS physical links are implemented
1 Institut f. Automation und Kommunikation e.V., 39106 Magdeburg,
Germany darina.schulze@ifak.eu
by radio channels. The set of all radio channels composes
the transmission medium. If W CS operate independently,
as usual today, the radio channels will most likely overlap
and cause interferences. A holistic arrangement, a so called
wireless coexistence management, is required.
II. C OEXISTENCE MANAGEMENT APPROACHES
In [1] we give an overview of the current coexistence
management approaches, which we describe in this Section.
Investigations on wireless coexistence and its management
have already been done years ago [4], [5], [6]. In fig. 2 we
give an overview of different implementations of coexistence
management approaches. There are four types of these imple-
mentations: manual management, automated non-cooperated
management and automated cooperated management, either
centralised or decentralised.
Coexistence Management
Manual Automated
Computer aided Cooperated Non-Cooperated
Centralised Decentralised
Fig. 2. Overview of coexistence management implementations [1]
In case of manual coexistence management a person is
responsible for preventing disturbances of the W CS. The

978-1-5386-2178-3/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE 95

only degrees of freedom the human coexistence manager
has is to change the frequency channel, which is not time
optimal. Therefore, manual coexistence management is only
advisable as far as no more advanced measures are available.
An automated non-cooperative management means that
different W CS cannot exchange information between each
other about their state. They just react on disturbances
and adapt their own behaviour on the current state. That
means a non-cooperative management system is prone to
disturbances due to different W CS. For the system as a
whole an automated non-cooperated management is missing.
This approach is not in our focus, therefore the reader can
find some information in [7], [8], [9], [10], [11] and the
references therein.
An automated cooperative management means that every
W CS could exchange information on their state with each
other. On the one hand these information exchange could
be centralised or on the other hand decentralised. A central
management has a central instance, e.g. the central coordi-
nation point, collecting the status information of each W CS.
In [12] there is a concept of such a central instance. However,
this concept does not specify an algorithm to ensure coex-
istence. This is left open for future developments. Another
approach is the decentralised cooperated management, where
W CS exchange their state with the others. In [13] there is a
consideration of Secondary-User networks and Primary-User
constraints. The authors introduce an optimization parameter,
Quality of Coexistence (QoC). They want to maximize QoC
with an interference-constrained time slot splitting. This
method is focused on a W iF i technology and thus not
suitable for a holistic coexistence approach.
Most of the mentioned approaches avoid interferences by
using medium access control mechanisms. In current re-
search activities on coexistence management, an application-
related, technology-independent automated coexistence man-
agement is missing. Our research focusses on this subject.
To reach this aim, we investigate control engineering ap-
proaches, see [3].
In this contribution we describe the first stage of our model
for the holistic approach - the interference-free (nominal)
communication behaviour. Here we use Petri-net modelling
for the general case with several W CS, which is an ex-
tension from [1]. We propose a general structure for the
coexistence plant in state space model representation, which
is independent from used wireless technology.
Paper Structure Section III describes the control engineer-
ing approach to wireless coexistence management and a basic
coexistence plant model with Petri-net structure. In Section
IV we present a general description with several W CS in
state space model representation for the interference-free
(nominal) case. In Section V we parametrize the nominal
case in a specific 2.4 GHz and show simulation results and
Section VI provides a summary as well as a discussion.
Basic Nomenclature We denote the set Rmax =
(R ∪ {−∞} ∪ {∞}) in max − plus algebra with
two binary operations q ⊕ w = max(q, w) and
q ⊗ w = q + w, ∀q, w ∈ Rmax . The neutral element
96
with respect to (w.r.t.) ⊕ is ε −→ −∞, such that
ε ⊕ w = max(ε, w) = w and the neutral element w.r.t. ⊗
is e := 0, such that e ⊗ w = 0 + w = w. Furthermore, we
denote the state space model representation for the event
discrete system state x(k + 1) = f (x(k)) as x+ = f (x).
III. A C ONTROL ENGINEERING APPROACH FOR AN
AUTOMATED COEXISTENCE MANAGEMENT
A class model has been developed as depicted in fig. 3
in order to consider all relevant aspects for an automated
coexistence management [1]. It is based on a class model
for wireless industrial automation. Here wireless industrial
automation is modelled as a composition of distributed
automation application (DAA), W CS and the radio environ-
ment. The automated coexistence management system shall
be an aggregation of the same elements complemented by a
coexistence controller. Thus, beside the system- and device-
related influencing parameters of the W CS, e.g. antenna
gain or output power, the application-related influencing
parameters, e.g. position of communication device or user
data length, the characteristic parameters, e.g. transmission
time or update time, as well as the passive and active
environmental influencing parameters are taken into account.
For more details see [3].
Fig. 3. Class model of wireless industrial automation with automated
coexistent management system, compare to [1]
The automated coexistence management system may be
implemented using various types of algorithms. In [3] we
proposed a control engineering approach. Taking a control
circuit, as depicted in fig.4, shows the reference to the field
of consideration P (fig. 1).
D
W + E U Y
- C P
Y
Fig. 4. Classical Scheme of a control circuit
The plant P is a set of W CS, relevant for coexistence
management, forming the coexistence plant, see Fig. 1. Each
W CS is considered as a sub-plant p(i) , with i ≤ s and
p(i) ∈ P . The total number of p(i) is described by s.
Furthermore, every p(i) has at least one logical link l, which We divide the functionality of a W D into a distributed
describes the connection from S to T . Therefore, we classify application function (DAF ) represented by θDAF and a
every sub-plant with p(i,l) . The controller C represents a set wireless communication function (W CF ) represented by
of central or distributed coexistence management functions θW CF . In S, DAF is responsible for message generation and
implemented in instances of the class coexistence controller. W CF is responsible for, i. a. medium access, link control
The reference parameter vector W (i,l) is a set of required or wireless transmission. In T, W CF determines on success
characteristic parameter values from all distributed automa- of message transmission and DAF processes the received
tion applications p(i,l) . The control parameter vector Y (i,l) message. For the purpose of coexistence management DAF
represents the set of measured values of the characteristic pa- also calculates the characteristic parameter values and evalu-
rameters in p(i,l) . The difference between required and actual ates the coexistence state. The medium is represented by θm
characteristic parameter values result in the error parameter for the interf erence − f ree state (nominal state). Thus, θd
vector E (i,l) in p(i,l) . The controller C uses the influencing implements the calculation of interferences for each message
parameters of the distributed automation applications or of transmission for later evaluation of coexistence. In fig. 5 we
the wireless devices as manipulated parameter vector U (i,l) indicate the interference case with dashed arcs. In this paper
for each p(i,l) . The disturbance parameter vector D(i,l) we focus on the description of the nominal behaviour of
represents the active environmental influencing parameters the introduced Petri-net model. That means even through we
affected by the passive influencing parameters in p(i,l) . For are describing the modelling of the wireless transmission for
the design of an automated coexistence management, we different W CS. It is important to underline, that we are
start with modelling of the coexistence plant P . In [1] we assuming for this purpose that these W CS not interfere
showed a first modelling approach in Petri-net graph notation each other. For the nominal behaviour the set of places
G = (θ, λ, ξ, ν), whereat θ is the set of places, λ is the set are constituted as {θDAF s , θW CF s , θm , θDAF t , θW CF t } ∈
of transitions, ξ is the set of arcs and ν is the set of its θ. The transitions λref s and λref t represent the message
weights (see Fig. 5). Furthermore, we defined the behaviour transfer via source reference interface and target reference
of the Petri-net P N = (G, x(0), v), whereat x(0) presents interface. λm1 represents the medium transition in S for
the vector of the initial marking state and v presents the the medium and λm2 represents the transition from medium
vector of transition delays. With respect to P N we defined to T , such that {λref s , λm1 , λm2 , λref t } ∈ λ. We describe
the transformation from wireless industrial automation to messages with its properties by using coloured tokens. In
Petri-net according to table (tab.) I. tab. II relevant properties are listed.
TABLE I TABLE II
T RANSFORMATION OF MODEL ELEMENTS FOR WIRELESS INDUSTRIAL P ROPERTIES OF A MESSAGE
AUTOMATION TO P ETRI - NET Properties Parameter
Model element in Petri-net modelling W CS type ST ID
wireless industrial automation element W CS SID
Processing and buffer for messages Place θ Logical link (S, T) LLID(S, T )
Processing for messages Transition λ Message identifier M ID
Time behaviour of message Transition delay v of λ Time of occupied medium ton
transmissions Time of not occupied medium tof f
Transmission path of messages arc ξ Physical link (S, T) P LID(S, T )
Total number of messages per path weight ν Transmit power (S, T) EIRP (S, T )
Message Token Interference vector (EIRP (S, T ), f, ton )
Message properties, see tab. II Token properties Success of message transmission SM T
Delay in S (DAF , W CF ) v1 , v 2
Delay in T (DAF , W CF ) v4
Delay of medium v3

Source λin T arget λout

vout
In the following Section we describe the modelling of the
θDAF s θDAF t
nominal behaviour for the coexistence plant with several
DAF
W CS. Therefore, we describe the structure for message
λref s Ref erence Interf ace λref t distribution in state space representation. For modelling the
behaviour of the control signal Y (e.g. transmission time) we
v1 v4
Interf erence are using max − plus algebra in state space representation
θW CF s λd1 θd λd2 θW CF t
for P .
W CF vd1 vd2
λm1 θm λm2 IV. M ODELLING OF THE COEXISTENCE PLANT
v2 v3 First of all we consider the nominal behaviour. Therefore
Interf erence − f ree we declare the amount of weights ν, which determine the
amount of messages per state transition with ∀ν(λj , θi ) > 1
Fig. 5. Graphical presentation of the general coexistence plant P [1] and ∀ν(θi , λj ) > 1. As described in [1] we introduce the

97
coexistence state xc of P . We split the coexistence state in get
(i,l) (i,l) (i,l)
xc = [xdis , xtb ]T ], whereat xdis is the state of θ with  (i,l)+     (i,l)+ 
(i,l) x1tb ε ε ε ε x1tb
their allocated token and xtb models the time behaviour of  (i,l)+  v (i,l)  (i,l)+ 
token transmissions (Message transmissions over all logical x2tb   2 ε ε ε
 x2tb 
 (i,l)+  =  (i,l)   (i,l)+  ⊕ (6)
links in all W CS). In this contribution we will show an x3tb   ε v3 ε ε x3tb 
(i,l)+ (i,l) (i,l)+
extension of our model with respect to the wireless commu- x4tb ε ε v4 ε x4tb
nication of more than one W CS. Since we are focussing on | {z }
(i,l) A0
the nominal behaviour xdis = [x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 , x5 ]T , which  (i,l) 
corresponds θ = [θDAF s , θW CF s , θDAF t , θm , θW CF t ]T as v1
 ε  (i,l)+
places with their allocated token. For the initial marking ⊕
 ε u (7)

(i,l)
we have xdis (0) = [x01 , x02 , x03 , x04 , x05 ]T . The marking
distribution in places describes the following model ε
| {z }
  B0
1 −1 0 0 0 0 (i,l)

(i,l)
0 1 −1 0 0 0 y = ε ε ε e xtb . (8)
(i,l)+ (i,l)  
xdis = xdis +   0 0 1 −1 0 0 ej , (1) For the explicit form we take the rule, see [14]
0 0 0 1 −1 0 
(i,l)+
0 0 0 0 1 −1 xtb = (A30 ⊕ A20 ⊕ A0 ⊕ E)(B0 u(i,l)+ ), (9)

whereat ej = [λin , λref s , λm1 , λm2 , λref t , λout ]T is a binary
vector of switching transitions.
In the reminder of this contribution we use the state space
representation of the timed-based Petri-net. We switch from
Petri-net specific symbols to those common in control theory.
(i,l)
For describing the time behaviour of P we introduce xtb =
{x1tb , x2tb , x3tb , x4tb }T as time stamps of a token when the
vector transition λ(i,l) = [λref s , λm1 , λm2 , λref t ]T fires. The
relevant time delay represents v (i,l) = [v1 , v2 , v3 , v4 ]T for
with A∗ = A30 ⊕ A20 ⊕ A0 ⊕ E. For using this rule we have
to prove that A40 = N . That means A0 has no circuit. We
consider the worst case for A0 , such that ∀v1,2,3,4 6= εM .
That means every place in p(i,l) is empty. A0 is given in eq.
8. For proving that A40 = N we consider the path of delay
weights, the precedence graph ρ(A0 ), fig. 6
v2
(i,l)
1 2
v3 (i,l)

each token in p(i,l) . With respect to max − plus algebra, we

introduce the neutral elements (N, E) ∈ Rmax .
(i,l)
    v4
ε ε ... ε e ε ... ε 3 4
ε ε . . . ε ε e . . . ε
N = E = . .
   
.. . ..
. ..  . ..  Fig. 6. Precedence graph ρ(A0 )
 
ε ε ε ε
ε ... ε ε ε ... ε e
(2) Every node presents the transition with their time stamp
(i,l)
xtb for every p(i,l) . For calculation A20 , A30 and A40 we get
We describe the time behaviour of each message transmission the following matrices:
per logical link with the following state space notation:
ε ε ε ε
 
(
(i,l)+ (i,l)
(i,l) xtb = f (xtb , u(i,l) ) ε ε ε ε
A20 = 

p : (i,l) . (3) v2(i,l) ⊗ v3(i,l)
, (10)
y (i,l) = h(xtb ) ε ε ε
(i,l) (i,l)
ε v3 ⊗ v4 ε ε
For describing the linear case in max − plus algebra we 
ε ε ε ε

(i,l)
assume, that ∀xdis (0) the places are empty. Thus, compare ε ε ε ε
A30 = 

(i,l)
to [14] the general description of xtb can be described as ε ε ε . (11)

 ε
(i,l) (i,l) (i,l)
(i,l)+ (i,l)+ v2 ⊗ v3 ⊗ v4 ε ε ε
xtb = A0 xtb ⊕ B0 u(i,l)+ (4)
(i,l)
ytb
(i,l)
= C0 xtb . (5) A0 has no circuit, because it is obviously that A40 = N . For
the reminder of this contribution we use eq. 9 as the explicit
Here, A0 describes the switching times of transitions (xtb )
(i,l) form.
in dependency of the initial positions of messages in places.
V. PARAMETRISATION OF THE COEXISTENCE PLANT
B0 describes the switching times of transitions (u(i,l) ) in
dependency of the initial positions of messages in places. In fig. 7 we depict the test setup for the nominal time
First of all, we define u(i,l) = λin as transition for the behaviour in a 2.4 GHz ISM band with W iF i technology
transfer interval (time interval for message generation) and [1].

98
 Anritsu
W iF i
T AP AP QP ER Client
PC
Fig. 7. WiFi system setup for a 2.4 GHz frequency spectrum [1]
For this purpose the W iF i traffic from access point (AP )
(S) to the client (T ) is recorded and the characteristic values
are determined for model parametrisation. The behaviour
of the wireless transmission channel is emulated by the
Qosmotec Propagation Effects Replication (QP ER). A fixed
distance of 10 m is configured between access point and
client. The application-related traffic is generated through
the Anritsu, which we configured with an attenuation from
−60 dB. The output power is 10 dBm. PROFINET IO
(P N IO) is used as application traffic. P N IO messages with
a data length of 1024 Bit are transmitted at a transfer interval
of 2 ms (periodic signal). The test access point (T AP ) cre-
ates a passive access point to the Ethernet network and copies
the test traffic at the reference interface to the measuring
computer P C. In fig. 8 we simulate time stamps of the input
signal (transfer interval uin ) with a periodic behaviour and
the time stamps of the output signal (transmission time x4 )
according to eq. 9 for 5 events in nominal case for Rmax .
In Rmax the transition is active (firing transition) at e and
inactive (non firing transition), at .
Transfer interval of logical link 1 from p 1 in Rmax
1 modelling of the disturbance for interference cases with
Activity
In fig. 9 we zoom one time stamp for considering the
time delay from input signal to output signal. Here we
have a delay from 0.001917 s, which corresponds to the
T AP
measurements. In tab. V we present the transmission time
per event k.
TABLE III
T RANSMISSION TIME FOR NOMINAL CASE
Event k Transmission time [s]
1 0.001917
2 0.001885
3 0.001882
4 0.001904
5 0.001908
VI. C ONCLUSION
In this contribution we derived a nominal plant model for
the evaluation of an application-related, technology indepen-
dent automated coexistence management process with Petri-
net modelling in max − plus algebra. The coexistence plant
provides fundamental communication relationships between
different wireless communication systems, like the time
behaviour of messages in a communication net. We showed
that the precedence graph has no circuit to generate the
explicit form for the plant model in state space model repre-
sentation. Hence we can investigate the system behaviour,
e.g. the dynamics for stability analysis. Furthermore, we
parametrized the model in a specific test environment in a
2.4 GHz frequency spectrum for WiFi.
We presented the modelling for a general coexistence
plant in interference-free (nominal) case. The next step is

0 real coexistence scenarios for validation. Furthermore, we

-1 will investigate the robustness with system uncertainties
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time event of k-th firing time stamp u
according to different technologies, e.g. W iF i or Bluetooth.
in
Transmission time of logical link 1 from p 1 in Rmax
1 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Activity

0
Parts of this work are funded by ReICoVAir (16KIS0417)
-1 through the German Ministry of Research and Education
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time event of k-th firing stamp x
4
(BMBF).

Fig. 8. Modelling the transmission time of p(1,1) in Rmax R EFERENCES

[1] D. Schulze, L. Rauchhaupt, M. Kraetzig, and U. Jumar,
“Coexistence Plant Model for an Automated Coex-
1
Transfer interval of logical link 1 from p 1 in Rmax istence Management,” in 20th IFAC World Congress
Activity

(WC’17), IFAC-PapersOnLine, Toulouse, France, July

0
9th - 14th 2017, pp. 357–364.
-1
1.99 1.995 2 2.005 2.01 [2] IEC62657-2, “Ed1: Industrial Communication Net-
Time event of k-th firing time stamp u works Wireless Communication Networks Part 2:
in

1
Transmission time of logical link 1 from p 1 in Rmax Coexistence Management,” IEC, Tech. Rep., 2014.
Activity

[3] D. Schulze and L. Rauchhaupt, “A Control Engineering

0
Approach for an Automated Coexistence Management,”
-1
1.99 1.995 2 2.005 2.01 in 4th IFAC Symposium on Telematics Application
Time event of k-th firing stamp x (TA’16), IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 49, no. 30, Porto
4
Alegre, Brazil, November 6th - 9th 2016, pp. 284 –
Fig. 9. Modelling the transmission time of p(1,1) zoom in Rmax 289.

99
 [4] A. Gnad, L. Gollub, and L. Rauchhaupt, “Multi-
Functional Interface for Tests of Industrial Wireless So-
lutions,” in Embedded World Conference Proceedings
Session 13-03, Nuernberg, Germany, February 26th -
28th 2008.
[5] M. Kraetzig and L. Rauchhaupt, “Parameters to Assess
Coexistence of Industrial Wireless Solutions,” in 5th
International Symposium on Automatic Control, Book
of Abstracts, Wismar, Germany, September 18th - 19th
2008, pp. 1–3.
[6] N. LaSorte, S. A. Rajab, and H. H. Refai, “Experimen-
tal Assessment of Wireless Coexistence for 802.15.4 in
the Presence of 802.11g/n,” in 2012 IEEE International
Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility, August
6th - 10th 2012, pp. 473 – 479, ISBN: 978–1–4673–
2061–0.
[7] K. Ahmad, U. Meier, and S. Witte, “Predictive Op-
pertunistic Spectrum Access Using Markov Models,”
in 17th IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies
and Factory Automation (ETFA 2012), Krakow, Poland,
September 17th - 21st 2012.
[8] K. Ahmad, G. Shrestha, and U. Meier, “Real-time
issues of predictive modeling for industrial cognitive
radios,” in IEEE 9th International Conference on In-
dustrial Informatics - INDIN 2011, Lisbon, Portugal,
Juli 26th - 29th 2011.
[9] S. Geierhofer, L. Tong, and B. M. Sadler, “Cognitive
Medium Access: Constraining Interference Based on
Experimental Models,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas
in Communications, vol. 26, no. 1, 2008.
[10] S. Haykin, “Cognitive Radio: Brain-Empowered Wire-
less Communication,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas
in Communications, vol. 23, no. 2, 2005.
[11] F. Yuecek and H. Arslan, “A Survey of Spectrum
Sensning Algorithm for Cognitive Radio Applications,”
Communication Surveys and Tutorials IEEE, vol. 11,
no. 1, pp. 116–130, 2009.
[12] M. Kraetzig and L. Rauchhaupt, “Koordinierung het-
erogener, industriellen Funkkommunikation durch ein
zentrales Koexistenzmanagement,” in Conference pro-
ceedings published on USB stick, ISBN 978-3-944722-
33-7, Magdeburg, November 17th - 18th 2015.
[13] C. Sun, G. P. Villardi, Z. Lan, Y. D. Alemseged, H. N.
Tran, and H. Harada, “Optimizing the Coexistence Per-
formance of Secondary-User Networks Under Primary-
User Constraints for Dynamic Spectrum Access,” IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 61, no. 8,
pp. 3665 – 3676, 2012.
[14] G. Cohen, S. Gaubert, and J.-P. Quadrat, “Max-plus
Algebra and System Theory : Where We Are and
Where to go now,” in IFAC Annual Reviews in Control,
vol. 23, 1999, pp. 207–219.

100