skip to main content
research-article
Open Access

Adaptive Real-Time Communication for Wireless Cyber-Physical Systems

Published:20 February 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Low-power wireless technology promises greater flexibility and lower costs in cyber-physical systems. To reap these benefits, communication protocols must deliver packets reliably within real-time deadlines across resource-constrained devices, while adapting to changes in application requirements (e.g., traffic demands) and network state (e.g., link qualities). Existing protocols do not solve all these challenges simultaneously, because their operation is either localized or a function of network state, which changes unpredictably over time. By contrast, this article claims a global approach that does not use network state information as input can overcome these limitations. The Blink protocol proves this claim by providing hard guarantees on end-to-end deadlines of received packets in multi-hop low-power wireless networks, while seamlessly handling changes in application requirements and network state. We build Blink on the non-real-time Low-Power Wireless Bus (LWB) and design new scheduling algorithms based on the earliest-deadline-first policy. Using a dedicated priority queue data structure, we demonstrate a viable implementation of our algorithms on resource-constrained devices. Experiments show that Blink (i) meets all deadlines of received packets, (ii) delivers 99.97% of packets on a 94-node testbed, (iii) minimizes communication energy consumption within the limits of the underlying LWB, (iv) supports end-to-end deadlines of 100ms across four hops and nine sources, and (v) runs up to 4.1 × faster than a conventional scheduler implementation on popular microcontrollers.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Yuvraj Agarwal, Bharathan Balaji, Seemanta Dutta, Rajesh K. Gupta, and Thomas Weng. 2011. Duty-cycling buildings aggressively: The next frontier in HVAC control. In Proc. of the ACM/IEEE Int. Conf. on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Johan Åkerberg, Mikael Gidlund, and Mats Björkman. 2011a. Future research challenges in wireless sensor and actuator networks targeting industrial automation. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Industrial Informatics (INDIN).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Johan Åkerberg, Frank Reichenbach, Mikael Gidlund, and Mats Björkman. 2011b. Measurements on an industrial WirelessHART network supporting PROFIsafe: A case study. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Nouha Baccour, Anis Koubâa, Luca Mottola, Marco Antonio Zúñiga, Habib Youssef, Carlo Alberto Boano, and Mário Alves. 2012. Radio link quality estimation in wireless sensor networks: A survey. ACM Trans. Sens. Netw. 8, 4 (2012), 1--34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Stefan Bouckaert, Wim Vandenberghe, Bart Jooris, Ingrid Moerman, and Piet Demeester. 2011. The w-iLab.t testbed. In Proc. of the ICST Int. Conf. on Testbeds and Research Infrastructures for the Development of Networks and Communities (TridentCom).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Gerth Stølting Brodal. 2013. A survey on priority queues. In Space-Efficient Data Structures, Streams, and Algorithms. Springer-Verlag, 150--163.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Randy Brown. 1988. Calendar queues: A fast O(1) priority queue implementation for the simulation event set problem. Commun. ACM 31, 10 (1988), 1220--1227. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Giorgio Buttazzo. 2005. Rate monotonic vs. EDF: Judgment day. Real-Time Syst. 29, 1 (2005), 5--26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Giorgio Buttazzo. 2011. Hard Real-Time Computing Systems: Predictable Scheduling Algorithms and Applications. Vol. 24. Springer Science 8 Business Media. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. CAN. 2004. ISO 11898-4:2004--Road vehicles--Controller area network (CAN)--Part 4: Time-triggered communication. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva, Switzerland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Octav Chipara, Chenyang Lu, Thomas C. Bailey, and Gruia-Catalin Roman. 2010. Reliable clinical monitoring using wireless sensor networks: Experiences in a step-down hospital unit. In Proc. of the ACM Conf. on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Octav Chipara, Chenyang Lu, and Gruia-Catalin Roman. 2013. Real-time query scheduling for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Comput. 62, 9 (2013). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Octav Chipara, Chengjie Wu, Chenyang Lu, and William Griswold. 2011. Interference-aware real-time flow scheduling for wireless sensor networks. In Proc. of the Conf. on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Contiki. 2011. Contiki: The Open Source OS for the Internet of Things. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.contiki-os.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Robert B. Dial. 1969. Algorithm 360: Shortest-path forest with topological ordering {H}. Commun. ACM 12, 11 (1969), 632--633. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Joakim Eriksson, Fredrik Österlind, Niclas Finne, Nicolas Tsiftes, Adam Dunkels, and Thiemo Voigt. 2009. COOJA/MSPSim: Interoperability testing for wireless sensor networks. In Proc. of the EIA Int. Conf. on Simulation Tools and Techniques (SIMUTools). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Federico Ferrari, Marco Zimmerling, Luca Mottola, and Lothar Thiele. 2012. Low-power wireless bus. In Proc. of the ACM Conference on Embedded Network Sensor Systems (SenSys). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Federico Ferrari, Marco Zimmerling, Lothar Thiele, and Olga Saukh. 2011. Efficient network flooding and time synchronization with glossy. In Proc. of the ACM/IEEE Int. Conf. on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. FlexRay. 2013. ISO 17458-1:2013--Road vehicles--FlexRay communications system--Part 1: General information and use case definition. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva, Switzerland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Omprakash Gnawali, Rodrigo Fonseca, Kyle Jamieson, David Moss, and Philip Levis. 2009. Collection tree protocol. In Proc. of the ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Yu Gu, Tian He, Mingen Lin, and Jinhui Xu. 2009. Spatiotemporal delay control for low-duty-cycle sensor networks. In Proc. of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Tian He, John A. Stankovic, Chenyang Lu, and Tarek F. Abdelzaher. 2005. A spatiotemporal communication protocol for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 16, 10 (2005), 995--1006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Honeywell. 2006. Choosing the Right Industrial Wireless Network. Retrieved from https://www.honeywellprocess.com/library/support/Public/Documents/WirelessWhitePaper_Nov2006.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. IEEE 802.15.4e TSCH. 2012. 802.15.4e-2012 - IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks--Part 15.4: Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks (LR-WPANs) Amendment 1: MAC sublayer. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. ISA 100.11a. 2011. ANSI/ISA-100.11a-2011 Wireless systems for industrial automation: Process control and related applications. International Society of Automation (ISA), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Vikram Kanodia, Chengzhi Li, Ashutosh Sabharwal, Bahareh Sadeghi, and Edward Knightly. 2001. Distributed multi-hop scheduling and medium access with delay and throughput constraints. In Proc. of the ACM Int. Conf. on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. JeongGil Ko and others. 2012. Low power or high performance? A tradeoff whose time has come (and nearly gone). In Proc. of the European Conf. on Wireless Sensor Networks (EWSN). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Krijn Leentvaar and Jan H. Flint. 1976. The capture effect in FM receivers. IEEE Trans. Commun. 24, 5 (1976), 531--539.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Roman Lim, Federico Ferrari, Marco Zimmerling, Christoph Walser, Philipp Sommer, and Jan Beutel. 2013. FlockLab: A testbed for distributed, synchronized tracing and profiling of wireless embedded systems. In Proc. of the ACM/IEEE Int. Conf. on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Chung Laung Liu and James W. Layland. 1973. Scheduling algorithms for multiprogramming in a hard-real-time environment. J. ACM 20, 1 (1973), 46--61. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Ke Liu, Nael Abu-Ghazaleh, and K.-D. Kang. 2006. JiTS: Just-in-time scheduling for real-time sensor data dissemination. In Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PERCOM). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Chenyang Lu, Brian M. Blum, Tarek F. Abdelzaher, John A. Stankovic, and Tian He. 2002. RAP: A real-time communication architecture for large-scale wireless sensor networks. In Proc. of the IEEE Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium (RTAS). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Ingo Molnar. 2015. The Linux Completely Fair Scheduler (CFS). Retrieved from https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/scheduler/sched-design-CFS.txt.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Luca Mottola, Mattia Moretta, Kamin Whitehouse, and Carlo Ghezzi. 2014. Team-level programming of drone sensor networks. In Proc. of the ACM Conf. on Embedded Network Sensor Systems (SenSys). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. S. M. Shahriar Nirjon, John A. Stankovic, and Kamin Whitehouse. 2010. IAA: Interference aware anticipatory algorithm for scheduling and routing periodic real-time streams in wireless sensor networks. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Networked Sensing Systems (INSS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Tony O’Donovan and others. 2013. The GINSENG system for wireless monitoring and control: Design and deployment experiences. ACM Trans. Sen. Netw. 10, 1 (2013), 1--40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Katsuhiko Ogata. 2001. Modern Control Engineering (4th ed.). Prentice Hall. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. M. Paavola and K. Leiviska. 2010. Wireless Sensor Networks in Industrial Automation. Springer-Verlag.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Ben Pfaff. 2004. An Introduction to Binary Search Trees and Balanced Trees. Retrieved from http://adtinfo.org/libavl.html/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Joseph Polastre, Robert Szewczyk, and David Culler. 2005. Telos: Enabling ultra-low power wireless research. In Proc. of the ACM/IEEE Int. Conf. on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Abusayeed Saifullah, You Xu, Chenyang Lu, and Yixin Chen. 2010. Real-time scheduling for WirelessHART networks. In Proc. of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Lui Sha, Tarek F. Abdelzaher, Karl-Erik Årzén, Anton Cervin, Theodore Baker, Alan Burns, Giorgio Buttazzo, Marco Caccamo, John Lehoczky, and Aloysius K. Mok. 2004. Real time scheduling theory: A historical perspective. Real-Time Syst. 28, 2--3 (2004), 101--155. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Bruno Sinopoli, Luca Schenato, Massimo Franceschetti, Kameshwar Poolla, Michael I. Jordan, and Shankar S. Sastry. 2004. Kalman filtering with intermittent observations. IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 49, 9 (2004), 1453--1464.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Marco Spuri. 1996. Analysis of Deadline Scheduled Real-Time Systems. Technical Report 2772. INRIA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Kannan Srinivasan, Prabal Dutta, Arsalan Tavakoli, and Philip Levis. 2010. An empirical study of low-power wireless. ACM Trans. Sen. Netw. 6, 2 (2010), 1--49. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. John A. Stankovic, Tarek F. Abdelzaher, Chenyang Lu, Lui Sha, and Jennifer C. Hou. 2003. Real-time communication and coordination in embedded sensor networks. Proc. IEEE 91, 7 (2003), 1002--1022.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. John A. Stankovic, Insup Lee, Aloysius Mok, and Raj Rajkumar. 2005. Opportunities and obligations for physical computing systems. IEEE Comput. 38, 11 (2005), 23--31. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. John A. Stankovic, Krithi Ramamritham, and Marco Spuri. 1998. Deadline Scheduling for Real-Time Systems: EDF and Related Algorithms. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Petcharat Suriyachai, James Brown, and Utz Roedig. 2010. Time-critical data delivery in wireless sensor networks. In Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. WirelessHART. 2010. IEC 62591:2010--Industrial communication networks--Wireless communication network and communication profiles--WirelessHART. International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), Geneva, Switzerland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Feng Xia, Yu-Chu Tian, Yanjun Li, and Youxian Sung. 2007. Wireless sensor/actuator network design for mobile control applications. Sensors 7, 10 (2007), 2157--2173.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Fengxiang Zhang and Alan Burns. 2009. Schedulability analysis for real-time systems with EDF scheduling. IEEE Trans. Comput. 58, 9 (2009), 1250--1258. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Haibo Zhang, Pablo Soldati, and Mikael Johansson. 2009. Optimal link scheduling and channel assignment for convergecast in linear WirelessHART networks. In Proc. of the Int. Symp. on Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc, and Wireless Networks (WiOPT). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Marco Zimmerling, Federico Ferrari, Luca Mottola, and Lothar Thiele. 2013. On modeling low-power wireless protocols based on synchronous packet transmissions. In Proc. of the IEEE Int. Symp. on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems (MASCOTS). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Marco Zimmerling, Luca Mottola, Pratyush Kumar, Federico Ferrari, and Lothar Thiele. 2016. Adaptive Real-time Communication for Wireless Cyber-physical Systems. Technical Report. ETH Zurich. Retrieved from ftp://ftp.tik.ee.ethz.ch/pub/publications/TIK-Report-356.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Adaptive Real-Time Communication for Wireless Cyber-Physical Systems

                        Recommendations

                        Comments

                        Login options

                        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

                        Sign in

                        Full Access

                        PDF Format

                        View or Download as a PDF file.

                        PDF

                        eReader

                        View online with eReader.

                        eReader