Proc.

of World Symposium On Computer Networks and Information Security, International

Conference on advance in Eng. & Tech. (ICAET’2014), Hammamet, Tunisia, pp. 186-193.

Siphons and Traps Structural Analysis Techniques Behaviour of a Petri

Nets
Mowafak Hassan Abdul-Hussin, Central Technical Information’s & Communications, University of
Technology, Baghdad, Iraq. E-mail: mow_abdul2007@yahoo.com

Abstract- Siphons and traps have been extensively used and investigated for the structural analysis techniques behavior of a
Petri net. The siphons are structures which allow for some implications on the net's can be well controlled by adding a control
place (called monitor) for each uncontrolled siphon in the net in order to become the deadlock-free situation in the system.
Also, it’s having appeared to play a special role in the liveness analysis of Petri nets (PNs), especially in ordinary ones. From
the structured properties of PN can investigate correctness to solve for concurrent systems. Structural properties such as
siphons can be checked directly on the Petri net and have the advantage of low computational complexity. Siphons can be to
characterize deadlock states and solve deadlock problems of Petri nets that model on flexible manufacturing systems (FMSs)
involving a resource allocation system. The deadlock control is usually concerned with minimal siphons. Structural analysis
techniques behavior in Petri nets is investigating the relationship between the behavior and structures of the net. In this paper,
a computer simulation system, the Petri Net Toolbox in MATLAB environment, which is based the analytical model
(Place/Transition-net) of concurrent processes of the reusable resources that are aimed mainly at providing for control of the
system, is present.

Keywords: Petri nets, structural analysis, siphons and traps, Toolbox PN-Tool 2.3

1. Introductions avoid deadlocks. In the liveness of the Petri net model

Petri nets have been characterized as a tool to
describe the structure and analysis the behavior of discrete
event systems (DESs), including FMS, computer systems,
software engineering, computer architecture, software
design, databases, programming, and automated guided
vehicles (AGV) … etc. The deadlock problem of PN may
occur to the resource share place in PN. The resource share
systems are places in PN holds through an alternative
firing transition and in the same time request a hold
transition to the same place. The properties of PN can be
classical into behavioral and structural properties. In a
Petri net analysis model has been used a special property
siphon analysis and PN reachability graph analysis. A
deadlock prevention occurs to an FMS when parts are
blocked waiting for shared resources held by others, that
will never be granted. In particular, deadlock prevention
problems are solved using the concept of siphons.
The problem of deadlocks based on a PN structure
called the siphon, which indeed are sometimes named as
“deadlock”. Siphons and traps are two special property
structures, related to basic behavioral properties of a Petri
net, which are dividing the net to the groups of sub-nets.
Siphons are well known to recognize in the analysis and
control of deadlocks in Resource Allocation Systems
(RASs) modeled on Petri nets. Many deadlock prevention
policies characterize the deadlock behavior of the systems
in terms of siphons and utilize this characterization to
DOI: 02.WSCNIS.2014.1.30
© N&N Global Technology 2014
guarantees the complete absence of deadlocks in the
corresponding program. Deadlock analysis based on Petri
nets has been widely studied for flexible manufacturing
systems and other technological applications involving a
resource allocation function.
Petri net theory provides for powerful analysis
techniques, which can verify the correctness system. The
study of structural properties and behavioral properties of
Petri nets has been made utilizing siphons. Siphons and
traps are good properties of sub-structures of Petri nets,
exerting a strong influence on their behavior [5].
Moreover, structural and behavioral properties of Petri
nets can be defined. A siphon is an important structural
concept of Petri nets. The behavioral property, which
relates to initial marking and has direct connection with
the simulated system, includes reachability tree,
coverability tree, deadlock-free, liveness, boundedness and
fairness. The siphon is a subset of places useful for
liveness analysis. When, all places in a siphon have no
token, all transitions connecting with the siphon cannot be
friable any more. Therefore, a siphon is widely used to
analyze liveness and prevent deadlock in many systems
modeled on Petri net [5-7] [10], especially in Flexible
Manufacturing Systems.
There are many research papers devoted to the
deadlock problem. In our approach, we have adopted Petri
nets as a tool for modeling on the dynamic behavior of the
186
system. This tool has also been adopted in several papers
related to the study of deadlock problems of FMS
environments. For a general class of Petri net models, in
(Viswanadham et al. (1990) [11]) both deadlock
prevention and avoidance control policies are proposed.
The first one is based on the net reachability graph, while
the second one is based on a look-ahead procedure that
searches for deadlock situations by simulating the system
evolution of a pre-established number of steps. Because
the avoidance policy does not assure that deadlocks are not
reachable, they propose to combine this policy on a
deadlock recovery system.
The deadlock avoidance algorithm (DAA) was
developed in Banaszak and Krogh (1990) [1] for a class of
FMSs called Production Petri Nets (PPN). This class
model a set of sequential processes sharing common
resources. At each operation, only one resource is used and
there are no alternative resource routings, which may lead
to resource allocation conflict. The DAA uses a restriction
policy, which limits the set of transitions that can be fired
for a given marking.
Banaszak and Abdul-Hussin (1988) [2] developed the
deadlocks avoidance methods with a Petri net approach to
the automatic design of control programs which are aimed
at supervision of concurrent, pipeline-like flowing
processes of FMS. They formulated investigation of the
sufficient condition for the design of a class of deadlock-
free Petri net. The method considered an algorithm that
transforms the given process specification into the net
model describing the dynamics of the process flow,
allowing a queuing Place/Transition-net model to be
properly modified. The main results obtained allow for
automatic conversion to the process specification, via the
net model of a control flow, into the relevant control
program. Banaszak and Abdul-Hussin (1995) [3]
developed control strategy, which guarantees the deadlock
avoidance. They proposed a general-purpose algorithm
that can be used in the synthesis of control procedures
ensuring the appropriate processes cooperation. The
algorithm aimed at the deadlock-free cooperation of
concurrent, pipeline-like flowing processes as well as for
its direct implementation, in assembler level languages, as
real-time control programs for FMS. Banaszak and Abdul-
Hussin (2002) [4] developed a new approach for
distributed deadlock avoidance control for Flexible
Manufacturing Systems. They constructed feasible
deadlock avoidance rules by exploiting the information
about the resource requirements of each particular
operation of a manufacturing process and/or the repetitive
character of the material and data process flow.
A special Petri net, called system of simple
sequential processes with resources (S3PR), is used by
Ezpeleta et al. (1995) [4] to describe an FMSs. S3PR is an
extension of the PPN in [1]. A circular wait situation
occurs in an S3PR just as PPN. In order to avoid the
deadlock, a deadlock prevention method based on the
concept of siphons has been introduced. They proposed a
deadlock prevention method by adding a control place and
related arcs to each strict minimal siphon (SMS) so that no
DOI: 02.WSCNIS.2014.1.30
© N&N Global Technology 2014
SMS can be emptied, which guarantees the liveness of the
controlled system. The number of added control places is
equal to that of SMSs in the target net. The rule of
allocating and releasing resources done, but S3PR allows
choices in the process of manufacturing a type of product.
That is, a type of product possibly possesses several
processing routes in an S3PR. It has been to show, that, for
an FMS to be deadlock-free, the Petri Net structure should
be free of unmarked siphons.
Tricas, et al. (2006) [10] presented a special subclass
of S3PR, called S4PR (simple S3PR) that is (simple
systems of simple sequential processes with resources
S4PR ). They proposed methods of the computation
Minimal Siphons in Petri net models of Resource
Allocation Systems (RASs). They developed a general
method of the complete enumeration of the set of minimal
siphons must be avoided (there can exist an exponential
number of such components), some deadlock prevention
methods rely on its (complete or partial) computation and
enumeration. The special syntactical constraints on some
classes of RASs can help in developing specific algorithms
to compute siphons in a more efficient way.
Huixia et al. (3013) [7] developed a new deadlock
prevention policy for a class of flexible manufacturing
systems called as systems of simple sequential processes
with resources (S3PRs). Siphon basis is introduced to
obtain a compact Petri net controller by considering the
complementary sets of siphons in S3PRs. A siphon basis
consists of strict minimal siphons (SMSs) whose
complementary sets can cover the complementary set of
each SMS in Petri nets.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2, some
basic definitions and notations of PNs are given. In
Section 3, Siphons and Traps properties have been
defined. An illustrative example is provided to illustrate
the presented this method. In Section 4, Petri Net models
on Flexible manufacturing systems used MATLAB tool-
PN to analytic properties of PN, which aimed at the
computer simulation model design are introduced.
Concluding remarks is given in Section 5.
2. Basic Definitions and Notations
This section contains the basic definitions and
notations of Petri net theory, which will be needed during
the remainder of the paper. We assume the reader is
familiar with basic Petri nets concepts. For more details
please, can found in [6] and [8]. A Place/ Transition Petri
nets (P/T-net, for short), which represents the basic class
of the sample family of Petri net models.
Definition 1. A Petri net is a 4-tuple Ψ = (P, T , E, W),
where P and T are finite non-empty sets (of places and
transitions, respectively), P ∩ T= ∅, and E ⊂ (P × T) ∪
(T × P) is a flow relation such that: dom(E) ∪ range(E) =
P ∪ T. An arc E joins a place to a transition or a transition
to a place, but never a transition to a transition or a place
to a place. W: (P x T) ∪ (T x P) → N is a weight function
187
attached to the arcs, where N → (1, 2, ... , N+). The
weight is represented by an integer located near the arc is
a function that assigns a weight to each arc. (When
Weights W, of the arcs (W) = l, the net Ψ is called
ordinary Petri net).
Definition 2. A marking Petri net is Ψ = (Ψ, M0) where,
Ψ is a Petri net and M0 is initial marking, M0: P → {1, 2,
… , N+}is the net initial marking of Ψ, assigned to each
place p ∈ P, M0(p) tokens, and where (N+ is a set of non-
negative integers). Every P/T-net is provided with an
initial marking M0, that may change a result of the firing
of a transition, (or a marking Petri net is 5-tuple: Ψ = (P,
T, E, W, M0)). Moreover, PN will be described either by
the pair Ψ = (Ψ, M0) where Ψ is a Petri net and M0 is
initial marking, or by 5 – tuple: Ψ = (P, T, E, W, M0).
Graphically, the Petri net Ψ is represented by a
diagram having two types of nodes. The elements of the
set P are called places, graphically represented by circles,
while the elements of the set T are called transitions,
represented by rectangles. The functions E defines the set
of direct arcs, weighted by non-negative integers. The
elements of the flow relation E pictorially are shown as
arcs connecting different types of nodes. A Petri net is
said to be ordinary if all of its arc weights W, are equal to
one. When the arc weight equal to zero stands for the
absence of an arc. A place is shown a number of tokens,
represented as black dots or a natural number. Ordinary
Petri nets are those for which arcs E: (P x T) ∪ (T x P)
→ {0, 1}. An ordinary Petri net is called a state machine
(SM) if ∀t ∈ T, | t● | = |●t | = 1. In order to describe the net
structure, the following representation is considered.
Definition 3. An Ordinary Petri Net Ψ is defined as a 5-
tuple Ψ = (P, T, Pre, Post, M0), where P is the set of
places (| P | = n), T is the set of transitions (| T | = m), and
(P ∪ T) ≠ ∅, and P ∩ T = ∅; Pre:(P x T) → N is the pre-
incidence matrix. Alternatively, an input functions that
defines directed arcs from places to transitions, where N
is a set of non-negative integers; and Post: (T x P) → N is
the Post-incidence matrix or an output function that
defines directed arcs from transitions to places; and M0: P
→ N is the initial marking. The execution of a Petri net
causes its marking to change. Execution is performed by
firing enabled transitions. A transition is enabled when
each one of its input places is marked with at least as
many tokens as the weight of the arcs connecting these
input places with the transition. A transit-ion fires by
removing as many tokens from each one of its input
places as the weight of the arcs connecting these input
places with the transition and by placing as many tokens
in each one of its output places as the weight of the arcs
connecting these output places with the transition.
DOI: 02.WSCNIS.2014.1.30
© N&N Global Technology 2014
Fig. 1, show pre- and post structure of Petri net.
x y x y
Pre-transitions → ●p Post-transitions → p●
Fig. 1. Illustrating the two structurally of PN
Definition 4. The pre-set (post-set) of a transition t is the
set of all input (output) places of t, ●t = {p | Pre(p, t) > 0}
and (t● ={p | Post(p, t) > 0}). The preset (post-set) of a
place p is the set of all input (output) transitions of p, ●p =
(∀t ∈ T, | E(t, p) ≠ 0), and (p● = (∀t ∈ T | E(p, t) ≠ 0)).
Suppose x ∈ X is arbitrary element of the net Ψ, ●x = {y |
(x, y) ∈ E} is called pre-set of x, and x● = {y | (x, y) ∈ E}
is called post-set of x.
Definition 5. (incidence matrix). The usefulness of the
symbols is a pre-set and a post-set of a place p ∈ P or a
transition t ∈ T: ●t = {p ∈ P| W(p, t) > 0} is the set of
input places of t. t● = {p ∈ P| W(p, t) > 0}is the set of
output places of t. ●p ={p ∈ P| W(p, t) > 0}is the set of
input transitions of p, and (p● ={p ∈ P| W(p, t) > 0}) is the
set of output transitions of p.
The Pre- and Post - incidence matrix of the net Ψ can
be represented as (n x m) matrix, Pre-and Post with
elements Pre (pi, tj ), and Post(pi, tj ) respectively. The
linear algebraic analysis method uses the description of a
Petri net by its so call incidence matrix C = (Cij) which is
defined by: C(pi, tj) = Pre(pi , tj) − Post(pi, tj), is the change
in number of tokens in pi after firing tj once, for i = (1, 2, ...
,n) and j = (1, 2, ... ,m). To find the C matrix is (the
composite change matrix). It is computed by subtracting
C─ from C+, that is: (matrix C = (C+ − C─ ), Cij = post (tj,
pi) − pre (pi, tj).
Definition 6. (firing transition ). A transition t fired if this
enabled. The firing of a transition t enabled at marking M,
removes E(p, t) token from each input place p to transition
t, and adds tokens to each output place p to transition t,
where E(t, p) is the weight of arc 1 to p. The marking M'
resulting from the firing of an enabled transition t in a
marking M, M[t〉M’, is defined as follows:
M'(p) = M(p) − E(p, t)+E(t, p) if ∀p ∈ (●t ∩ t●)
M'(p) = M(p) − E(p, t) if ∀p ∈ ( ●t \ t●)
M'(p) = M(p) + E(p, t) if ∀p ∈ (t● \ ●t)
M'(p) = M(p) otherwise
for all p∈ P, and where E is arc definition 1.
Definition 7. A transition t ∈ T is enabled at M if and
only if (iff) (∀p ∈ ●t) ( M(p) ≥ 1) and ( ∀p ∈ t●) (M(p) =
0). A transition t ∈ T is enabled at marking M iff ∀p∈ P:
M(p) ≥ Pre(p, t). A transition t enabled at M can fire
188
yielding a new marking M’ (reached marking) defined by
M’(p) = M0(p) − Pre(p, t) + Post(p, t), (it is denoted by
M[t〉M’).
Definition 8. (linear state equation). A sequence of
transitions σ ={t1, t2, … ,tn } is a firing sequence of (Ψ,
M0) iff there exists a sequence of markings such that
M0[t1〉 M1[t2〉 M2 . . . , [tn〉 Mn . Moreover, marking Mn is
said to be reachable from M0 by firing σ, and this is
denoted by M0[σ〉Mn. The firing sequence is a marking
(M1, M2, M3, … , Mn+1) such that: (∀i, 1 ≤ i ≤ n), and (Mi
[ti〉 Mi+1), We can also write its by [M1[σ〉Mn+1]. The set of
all markings reachable from M0 is denoted by Reachability
set R(M0). The function σ’: T → N+ is the firing count
vector of the firable sequence σ, i.e. σ′[t], represents the
number of occurrences of t ∈ T in σ. If M0[σ〉M’, then we
can write in vector forms M’= M0 + C.σ′, which is referred
to as the linear state equation of the net. A marking M0 is
said to be potentially reachable iff ∃X ≥ 0 such that: M′ =
M0 + C.σ ≥ 0, where σ is a firing sequence, a vector whose
i-th denotes the number of occurrences of in σ.
Definition 9. (Invariant). P-invariant (resp., T-invariant)
of a net Ψ = (Ψ, M0) is a non-negative row integer |P|-
vector x (respectively, |T|-vector y) satisfying the equation
xT. C = 0 (respectively, C. yT = 0), where C is the
incidence matrix of Ψ. A non-zero integer vector y ≠ 0,
(respectively x ≠ 0).
Definition 10. Let Petri net Ψ = (Ψ, M0), and a node x ∈
(P x T), •x denote the preset of x, i.e. x ∈ (P ∪ T) is
defined as •x = {y | ( y, x) ∈ pre(p, t)}. Similarly, x•
denotes the post-set of x, i.e. x• ={y | (x, y) ∈ post (p, t)}.
For X = {x1, x2, …, xn} ⊆ (P x T), and •X = {•x1 ∪ •x2 ∪
…, •xn}, X• = {x•1 ∪ x•2 ∪ … ∪ x•n}, are called the preset
and postset of X respectively.
Definition 11. (Properties Boundedness, and Safe-ness). A
marked PN (Ψ, M0) is said to be (marking) k-bounded iff
each of its places is k-bounded. A 1-bounded net is called
safe. A marked PN = (Ψ, M0) is bounded if there exists k
∈Ψ such that (Ψ, M0) is k-bounded. A net Ψ is structurally
bounded iff ∀M0 the marked (Ψ, M0) are k-bounded for
some k ∈Ψ.
Definition 12. (Reversibility). A Petri net (Ψ, M0), is
reversible if, in any marking Mk reachable from initial
marking M0, M0 is reachable from Mk , that is, it is always
possible to go back to the initial marking.
Among many properties of Petri, nets being searched
in literature. For the purpose of modeling of Flexible
Manufacturing Systems the most important properties are
liveness, boundness, safeness, deadlock, conservative,
persistence, reachability tree, reversibility, Siphon and
Trap. Let as recall the definition of the Petri nets liveness
playing the essential role in further considerations.
Definition 13. (Liveness). A transition t ∈ T is live in net
(Ψ, M0) iff ∀M ∈ R(Ψ, M0) ∃M’ ∈ R(Ψ, M0) such that
M’ enables t. The marked net (Ψ, M0) is live iff all its
transitions are live (i.e. liveness of the net guarantees the
DOI: 02.WSCNIS.2014.1.30
© N&N Global Technology 2014
possibility of an infinite activity of all transitions). A net Ψ
is structurally live iff ∃M0 such that the marked net (Ψ,
M0) is live. Transition t1 has a shared place p with
transition t2 iff p ∈ ●t1 ∩ ●t2. It should be noted that the
property of Definition 14, implies the absence of
deadlocks in the system modeled. Liveness in a Petri net
means that for all reachable markings from an initial
marking any transition can eventual be fired. This implies
absence of deadlock. In general, Petri nets may not be live.
Definition 14. (dead marking). A PN is live under M0 iff
∀t ∈ T, t is live under M0. A transition t ∈ T is live under
M0 iff ∀M ∈ R(Ψ, M0), ∃M' ∈ R(Ψ, M0), t is friable under
M’. A transition t ∈ T is dead under M0 if ∃ / M ∈ R (Ψ,
M0), where t is firable. A marking M ∈ R (Ψ, M0) is a
(total) deadlock iff ∀t∈ T, t is dead.
A P-invariant characterizes a token conservation rule
for a set of places, over which the weighted sum of tokens
is constant independently from any firing, i.e., for a p-
invariant x and any markings Mi , Mj ∈ Ψn , which are
reachable from M0 by the firing of transitions, it holds:
xT. M = xT. M0.
3. Siphons and Traps Properties
A siphon is a set of places that can become empty
and is known to be the cause for the lack of liveness and
reversibility in nets modeling the FMS resource allocation
[5]. A siphon and trap are a special properties structure of
a Petri net in which the net is divided lead to the sub-set of
places according to the places-invariants. These are
analysis to the checking of some properties of liveness,
deadlock-free, boundedness … etc., of a Petri nets are very
closely related. Siphon and traps have been used
extensively [10] and investigated for the structural analysis
of a Petri net. That the sets of places, siphons are
equivalent to deadlocks (or know as deadlocks). The
concept in structural analysis of a Petri net is the siphon. A
siphon is a set of places that once insufficiently marked
will be never marked again. A siphon is controlled if it
remains marked for all reachable markings. Liveness is an
important behavioral feature of Petri nets, which is closely
related to certain properties of siphons.
Definition 15. A siphon in a Petri Net is a structural object
defined as a non-empty subset of places, S. For a Petri net
(Ψ, M0), a non-empty subset S (resp. τ) of places is called
a siphon (resp. trap) if ●S ⊆ S●( resp. τ● ⊆ ●τ), i.e., every
transition having an output (resp. input) place in S has an
input (resp. output) place in S (resp. τ). If M0(S) = ∑ p ∈ S,
and M0(p) = 0, S is called an empty siphon at M0.
Definition 16. A sets of places τ is a trap iff: τ● ⊆ ●τ,
where τ is a minimal Trap iff there does not contained any
other Trap τ ⊆ p. A minimal siphon that does not contain a
marked trap is called a strict minimal siphon (SMS).
A siphon is called minimal if it does not contain
another siphon as a proper subset. S is maximal if no other
siphon includes it. It is called a strict minimal siphon
(SMS), denoted S, if it does not contain a trap. A siphon is
said to be controlled if it is marked under all reachable
189
markings. A trap is said to be minimal if it does not
contain another trap as a proper subset. τ is maximal if no
other trap includes it.
The union of two siphons (resp., traps) is again a
siphon (resp., trap). A siphon (trap) is called a basic siphon
(basic trap) if it cannot be represented as a union of other
siphons (traps). The union of some basic siphons (traps)
can generate so all the siphons (traps) in a Petri net. A
siphon (trap) is said to be minimal if it does not contain
any other siphon (trap). Minimal siphons (traps) are basic
siphons (traps), but not all basic siphons (traps) are
minimal.
={t2, t3, t4}, and S2● ={t1, t2, t3, t4}, therefore, ●S2 ={t2, t3,
t4} ⊆ S2● = {t1, t2, t3, t4}. So that, we can be complete the
rest sets of siphons in this manner.
Therefore, the set traps {t1, t3, t2, t4}⊆ {t2, t1, t4, t3} is
true. So that, we can computation the rest sets of traps in
this manner. The incidence matrix C of the net in Fig 3, is
an (5 x 4) matrix. The Petri net of Fig. 2, has the following
incidence matrices shown in Fig 3.
Similarly, the calculation of a minimal Trap is:
τ6 = {p1, p3, p4, p5} for example {p1, p3, p4, p5}● = {t1,
t3, t2, t4}⊆ ●{p1, p3, p4, p5} = {t2, t1, t4, t3}.

Example 1
Let us consider the Petri net shown in Fig. 2, is an
example of the siphon and trap. The initial marking is
represented by: M0 = [0, 1, 0, 0, 2]T, the solid black circles
in M(p2 ) = 1 and M(p5 ) = 2 are represent the tokens of the
initial marking.

Fig. 3. The incidence matrix of Fig. 2

According to the definition 8, linear state equation is

an ordinary Petri net a transition t of an ordinary. Petri net
is enable if and only if each of its input places contains at
least one token. In the example represented in Fig. 2, the
Figure 2. Example of Petri net structure initial marking M0 = [0, 1, 0, 0, 2]T and the following
transitions can be fired starting from M0.
The only transition initially enabled in the net is
transition t4. As it fires, the token is removed from p5 and
is added to p4, the result marking is M1 =[0, 1, 0, 1, 1],
which enables transition t2. The pre-set of transition t2, is
●
t2 ={p1, p2}, and the post-set of place p4, is p•4 ={t2, t3}.
Transition t3 is not enabled by this new marking since p3 ∈
pre(t3) is not marked. The Petri net of Fig. 2, has contains
7-sets of siphons and 7-sets of traps (excluding the entire
set of places, which is both a siphon and a trap).

Obviously, there are 7-sets of siphons:

[S1= {p4, p5}, S2 = {p1, p4, p5}, S3 = {p1, p2, p4, p5}, S4
= {p2, p4, p5}, S5 = {p1, p3, p4, p5}, S6 = {p2, p3, p4, p5}, and
S7 = {p1, p2, p3, p4, p5}].

There are 7-sets of traps: [ τ1 ={p2, p3}, τ2 = {p2, p3,

p4}, τ3 ={p1, p2, p3}, τ4 ={p1, p2, p3, p4}, τ5 ={p2, p3, p4,
p5}, τ6 ={p1, p3, p4, p5}, and τ7 ={p1, p2, p3, p4, p5}].
Among them, {p4, p5} is minimal siphons, and
{p2, p3}, {p1, p3, p4, p5}, are minimal traps.
In order to calculation a siphon and trap, let us return
to the net in Fig. 2. The set of places S1 = {p4, p5},
constitutes a siphon, the set of pre-transitions is ●S1 = {t3,
t4}, and the set of post-transitions is S●1 = {t2, t3, t4}.
Therefore, the set of siphon ●S1 = [{t3, t4} ⊆ S1● = {t2, t3,
t4}]. Another siphon analyzed S2 = {p1, p4, p5}, since ●S2
DOI: 02.WSCNIS.2014.1.30
© N&N Global Technology 2014
Fig. 4. the Coverability tree of Fig. 2.
Apply definition (8), state equation M′ = M0 + C.σ,
and taking the column vector of firing transition from the
incidence matrix on Fig.3. The marking can be evolving
M1 = [0, 1, 0, 1, 1]T after the firing of t4. Such that M1 =
M0 + C. σt4 = [0, 1, 0, 0, 2]T + [ 0, 0, 0, 1, –1]T = [0, 1, 0,
1, 1] = M1. Each of these new markings represent a node
of the reachability tree and used next-state at firing
transition. In the sequel, the next marking can be found by
adding last marking to the column of transition shown in
190
Fig. 3, where transition t2 is enable. The new marking M2
= M1 + C.σt2 = [0, 1, 0, 1, 1] + [1, 1, 0, –1, 0]T = [1, 2, 0,
0,1] = M2, and M3 = M1 + C.σt4 = [0, 1, 0, 1, 1] + [ 0, 0, 0,
1, –1]T = [0, 1, 0, 2, 0] = M3, and in the rest of the net. Our
experiment is to compute and analysis of Petri net in Fig.
2, the PN Toolbox in MATLAB is display the reachability
tree and marking list as shown in Figure 4.

Many properties of Petri nets can be analyzing using the

reachability graph or the coverability graph in MATLAB
[8]. The PN Toolbox has been motivated by the fact that
MATLAB is very popular software. The following steps
can be experiments in MATLAB for the Petri net in Fig.
2., which is investigate the reachability graphs in order to
find siphons (that is structural deadlocks in classical
terminology) the net, and analyze its structural properties.
The analysis approach experiments in MATLAB for
the study of the so-called behavioural properties of Petri
nets are the construction of the coverability tree or
coverability graph using untimed Petri net model.
Therefore, the behavioral properties (including deadlock)
can show in the Figure 4. The aims at the evaluations are
the implemented siphons calculation and the control
places synthesis, which are possible to see in existing
software tools. Petri Net Toolbox in MATLAB is tool
enable its user to evaluate different control structure of
PN via visualization of processes flow and some
performance statistics calculation using the computer
simulation method.
Fig. 5. A production line consisting of two machines
Petri nets are a good tool used for modeling and
analysis of discrete event systems (DESs). In addition, PN
structure includes deadlock prevention and avoidance,
supervisory control is different forms of FMS's. Siphons
and traps are a new kind of invariants of PN. Differently,
from those associated with flows, the invariant laws
associated with siphons and traps do not hold in every
marking. The net of Fig. 6, has the following minimal
siphons. A siphon S1 = {p1, p2, p3} is both minimal siphon
and trap since ●S1 ⊆ S1● = {t1, t2, t3}. A trap τ1●= {p1, p2,
p3}● = {t1, t2, t3}, and ●τ1 = ●{p1, p2, p3} = {t3, t1, t2}, so
that a trap is true, where τ1● ⊆ ●τ1.

4. Petri Net Models of FMS's

Example 2.
Let us consider a flexible manufacturing system (FMS)
consisting of two machines M1 and M2, and two
industrial robots R1, and R2 as shown in the Fig.5. A
robot R can pick up and deliver products between M1 and
M2. The manufactures produced two types of part, A and
B. In addition, there are two types of A parts (A1, A2),
and two type of B parts (B1, B2). All part of either type
needs two machine operations to completion product. For
instance A1-part and B1-part has requires two operations
Figure 6. Petri net model of a FMS [6].
1 and 2 to be processed by M1, in order to become final
The Petri Net structure Fig. 6, are equivalent representations all
production, while a A2-part and B2-part, has requires constrictions of the FMS in Fig. 5.
two operations 2 and 1 to be processed by M2. We
assume that the types parts are continuously supplied Legend: Petri Net model of flexible assembly system
while the produced parts are shipped away. While the p1= M1 Machine1 is ready
assembling is complete, machine and the robots are
released product. Referring to the method presented in p2 = A1 a type part A1 perform by M1(op1) first.
[6], a Petri net model is given in Fig. 6. The Petri net p3 = B1 a type Part B1, perform by M1 (op2)
model in fig. 6, places, transition, and arcs are structure second
according to the operational requirements in order to p4 = R1 Robot-1 is ready
complete the product. P5 = R2 Robot-2 is ready
P6 = B2 a type Part A2, perform by M2 op1 first
P7 = R1 a type Part B2, perform by M2 op2
second

DOI: 02.WSCNIS.2014.1.30 191

© N&N Global Technology 2014
 P8 = M2 Machine 2 is ready
t1 models starting op1 for the type a part
A1
t2 models starting op2 for the type a part
B2
t3 assembly process is completed, the M1
and the robot are released
t4 models starting op1 for the type a part
A2
t5 models starting op2 for the type a part
B2
t6 Assembly process is completed, the M2
Fig. 8. The Coverability tree of fig. 6
and the robot are released
Having applied the graphic an MATLAB based PN
Other siphon S2 = ●S2 = ●{p2, p3, p4, p7} = {t1, 2t2, t5, t6},
analysis and visualization of simulation results.
and S2● = {p2, p3, p4, p7}● = {t1, 2t2, t3, t5, t6}●. Therefore
When an untimed PN is live, then the FMS modeled by
the siphon is true, where ●S2 ⊆ S2●. Similarly a trap is τ●2 this PN will not be confronted able with the deadlock
= {p2, p3, p4, p7}● ={t1, t2, t3, t5, t6}, and ●τ2 ={t1, t2, t3, t5,
problem, no matter how long each operation takes, if the
t6}. Moreover, S2 both a minimal siphon and trap (or a P- sequenc of the operations along the entire production flow
invariant). There are 5-sets of minimal siphons, and 4-sets
is not changed. PN in MATLAB toolbox is contained key
of minimal trap in Fig. 6, shown at the following table 1.
functions for the analysis of Petri net properties.
The properties menu on MATLAB toolbox provides
Table 1.
computational tools for the analysis of the behavioral and
structural properties of the current PN model of Fig. 6.
The MATLAB toolbox menu displays all the result sets of
siphon and trap. By considering the possible controlled-
siphon property, the added control place can be connected
arcs to the necessary places in order to become deadlock-
free. In Fig. 6, the minimal siphon whose emptiness leads
An MATLAB is one of the most popular software tools to the deadlock of the net shown in Figure 8. To control
for the area of applied mathematics and control the net prevented from being unmarked, a place C is
engineering; it is becoming the standard environment to added with ●C = {t3, t6} and C● = {t1, t4}, as shown in Fig.
interchange ideas implemented in algorithms. State-flow 9, in order to the control, is a Petri net in fig 6.
processes are a graphical design and development tool for
control and supervisory. Also, Petri nets are successfully
used its in the real applications to control parts assembly
system, and automatic manufacturing system, warehouse
load/unload system.
The Petri Net Toolbox Version 2.3 [8], is a software
tool for simulation, analysis and design of FMSs, based
on PN models. An MATLAB toolbox for simulation,
analysis and design with PN is characterize in accuracy of
design and implementation of distributed manufacturing
control systems with (P/T-net). Note that the PN models
shown in Fig. 6, considered encompasses the all-possible
realizations of the assembly process execution. For
instance, the deadlock situation shown in Fig. 8 is
modeled by the marking M4 = [0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0] at the
transition t4, in the third level of the Coverability tree
shown in Figure 8. Fig. 9. Additional place C, called control place in order to
The deadlock is occurring when transition t1 fire, next controlled siphon.
transition t4 is the deadlock. The computer simulation of
the proposed manufacturing system using untimed Petri
nets provides the possibility to view the manufacturing
process.

DOI: 02.WSCNIS.2014.1.30 192

© N&N Global Technology 2014

Fig. 10. Marking list of Fig. 9, is deadlock-free
The initial marking of control places C is one. Such
an additional place is called a monitor (or control place) in
terms of its role. In Fig. 9, the addition of C leads to an
extra minimal siphon that is a marked trap. As a result, no
siphon can be emptied in the net and it is deadlock-free
(actually live). This example motivates one to discover the
mechanism to make a siphon controlled by adding a
monitor. The result of the analysis of Petri nets is shown in
Fig. 10, because the MATLAB tool can be shown the PN
shape in the simulation is accurate and correct results.
[4] Banaszak, Z. A., and Mowafak H. Abdul-Hussin (2002),"
Deadlock Handling for Distributed Workflows", In: Engineering
& Technology Journal, Published by Univ. of Technology ,
Baghdad , No.5, Vol. 21, 2002, pages 377- 388.
[5] Ezpeleta. J. ; J.M. Colom, and J. Martinez, (1995)," A Petri net
based deadlock prevention policy for flexible manufacturing
systems," IEEE Trans. on Robotics and Automation, vol. 11, no. 2,
pp. 173-184
[6] Hruz B., and M.C. Zhou, (2007) ,"Modeling and Control of
Discrete-event Dynamic Systems with Petri Nets and Other Tool";
Springer, London Limited.
[7] Huixia Liu, and Gao Zhenxin ," Siphon Basis-Based Design of
Petri Net Controllers for a Class of Flexible Manufacturing
Systems, In: 2013 IEEE International Conference of IEEE Region
10 (TENCON 2013), pp. 1-4
[8] Mahulea, C., et al., (2003),” Home Page of the Petri Net Toolbox:
http://www.ac.tuiasi.ro/pntool
[9] Murata, T.(1989),"Petri nets: properties, analysis and
applications". Proc. of the IEEE 77(4): 541-580.
[10] Tricas, F., and J. Ezpeleta, (2006), “Computing Minimal Siphons
in Petri Net Models of Resource Allocation Systems: A Parallel
Solution", IEEE Tran. on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A:
System and Humans, Vol. 36, No. 3, MAY 2006, pages 532-539
[11] Viswanadham, N., et al., (1990),"Deadlock prevention and
deadlock avoidance in flexible manufacturing systems using Petri
net models", IEEE Trans. on Robotics and Automation 6(6): 713-
722

5. Conclusions
Petri net is a very good graphics and the
mathematical tool suitable for modeling and the analysis
of simulation may be efficiently carried out both
graphically and numerically. This paper presents an Mowafak Hassan Abdul-Hussin received the B.S. (1977) from
efficient a siphon and a trap for control structure analysis the Al-Mustansiriyah University, Baghdad and M.S., and Ph.D.
of PN in MATLAB Toolbox. This tool has a set of greatly degrees from the Technical University of Wroclaw, Poland,
1984, and 1989 respectively. Since 1991, he has been with the
help us to find siphon and trap easy reachability or University of Technology, Baghdad. His research interests
coverability tree, deadlock prevention, the liveness of an include Petri net theory and applications of the Flexible
ordinary Petri net can also be investigated. The properties Manufacturing Systems.
menu on MATLAB provides computational tools for the
analysis of the behavioral and structural properties of the
current PN model. Petri net model as a tool helps us to
behavioral investigation and structural properties. This
structure represents PN a well-known powerful and widely
used analytical formalism.

REFERENCES
[1] Banaszak Z. A., and B. H. Krogh ,(1990) “Deadlock avoidance in
flexible Manufacturing systems with concurrently competing
process flows", IEEE Trans. on Robotics & Aut. No.6, pp. 724-734
[2] Banaszak, Z., and Mowafak H. Abdul-Hussin (1988),"Petri net
approach to automatic real-time program synthesis", In: Control
and Cybernetics, Vol. 17, N. 4, pag. 361-375, Poland
[3] Banaszak, Z. and Mowafak H. Abdul-Hussin (1995), " Modelling
and Simulation of Flexible Assembly System: A Petri Net
Approach”, In: Qater University of Sciences Journal, Vol. 15, No.
2, pages 307-318

DOI: 02.WSCNIS.2014.1.30 193

© N&N Global Technology 2014