Next Article in Journal
Application of UAV in Topographic Modelling and Structural Geological Mapping of Quarries and Their Surroundings—Delineation of Fault-Bordered Raw Material Reserves
Previous Article in Journal
A New DGNSS Positioning Infrastructure for Android Smartphones
Previous Article in Special Issue
Virtualization of Industrial Real-Time Networks for Containerized Controllers
Open AccessReview

Survey on Wireless Technology Trade-Offs for the Industrial Internet of Things

1
IDLab, Department of Information Technology, Ghent University—imec, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
2
IDLab, Department of Computer Science, University of Antwerp—imec, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2020, 20(2), 488; https://doi.org/10.3390/s20020488
Received: 7 December 2019 / Revised: 10 January 2020 / Accepted: 13 January 2020 / Published: 15 January 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Real-Time Sensor Networks and Systems for the Industrial IoT)
Aside from vast deployment cost reduction, Industrial Wireless Sensor and Actuator Networks (IWSAN) introduce a new level of industrial connectivity. Wireless connection of sensors and actuators in industrial environments not only enables wireless monitoring and actuation, it also enables coordination of production stages, connecting mobile robots and autonomous transport vehicles, as well as localization and tracking of assets. All these opportunities already inspired the development of many wireless technologies in an effort to fully enable Industry 4.0. However, different technologies significantly differ in performance and capabilities, none being capable of supporting all industrial use cases. When designing a network solution, one must be aware of the capabilities and the trade-offs that prospective technologies have. This paper evaluates the technologies potentially suitable for IWSAN solutions covering an entire industrial site with limited infrastructure cost and discusses their trade-offs in an effort to provide information for choosing the most suitable technology for the use case of interest. The comparative discussion presented in this paper aims to enable engineers to choose the most suitable wireless technology for their specific IWSAN deployment. View Full-Text
Keywords: Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT); LoRa; IEEE 802.11ah; WiFi HaLow; Time Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH); Narrowband IoT (NB-IoT); Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE); BLE Long Range; WirelessHART; ISA100.11a Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT); LoRa; IEEE 802.11ah; WiFi HaLow; Time Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH); Narrowband IoT (NB-IoT); Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE); BLE Long Range; WirelessHART; ISA100.11a
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Seferagić, A.; Famaey, J.; De Poorter, E.; Hoebeke, J. Survey on Wireless Technology Trade-Offs for the Industrial Internet of Things. Sensors 2020, 20, 488.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop