Wireless Communication Technologies in
Automated Guided Vehicles: Survey and Analysis
1st Ming Zhan
College of Elec. and Info. Engineering
Southwest University
Chongqing, China
Abstract—Nowadays Automated Guided Vehicles (AGVs) have
been widely ultilized in modern production and manufacturing
industry. As wireless communication is one of the key technologies
in AGVs, one goal of this paper is to present a comprehansive
review of two most commonly used wireless standards in current
AGV systems, namely ZigBee and IEEE 802.11. We showed that
low latency and high reliability are two stringent requirements
in a Cyber-Physical System (CPS) based AGVs system. Based
on these analysis, we propose directions on possible wireless
communication standards that may suitable for future researches
of AGVs, as these solutions are specially optimized/designed for
machine type communications (MTCs), and can provide much
better performance than currently employed ones.
Index Terms—industrial automation,wireless control, automat-
ed guided vehicles, ZigBee, IEEE 802.11
I. Introduction
Over past decades, the significant progress in the technolo-
gies, such as autonomous guidance, pattern recognition, arti-
ficial intelligence, accurate sensing, embedded computing and
wireless communication networks, have fueled the rapid de-
velopment of Automated Guided Vehicles (AGVs) in different
industrial applications [1], [2]. For instance, traditional large
conveyor structures in warehouse systems are now replaced
by a fleet of AGVs for goods transportation and picking [3]–
[5]. Similar changes can also be founded in factory logistics,
hazardous work environment and Flexible Manufacturing Sys-
tems (FMSs) [6]–[8]. As AGVs can be programmed to adapt
to the changing environments and to reduce the involvement
of human operators, massive deployment of AGVs would be
of great help in increasing higher efficiency and lowing the
cost.
As a driverless mobile robot, an AGV usually consists of
four fundamental components [9]: vehicle, localization guid-
ance system, control system and communication system. As
shown in Figure 1, a vehicle moves to a predetermined location
for goods loading and unloading; the localization guidance
system detects the position changes of the vehicle through a
set of sensors; the control system coordinates the movement
of all vehicles to avoid conflicts or traffic congestions, as well
as task assignment; the communication system enables the
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China under Grant 61671390, and thanks The Key Laboratory of Networks
and Cloud Computing Security of University in Chongqing for support.
Correspondence should be addressed to Kan Yu; kan.yu@outlook.com
l-)))
2nd Kan Yu
Department of Comput. Sci. and Info. Technology
La Trobe University
Bendigo, Australia
Components in control system side
Wireless communication
Host computer module
Wireless
Sensor ĂĂ Sensor channel
Wireless communication
Localization & guidance module
system
Vehicle
Components in vehicle side
Fig. 1. Components of AGVs system.
information exchange among vehicles and the control system.
To the best of our knowledge, previous research works in
this area are mainly focused on localization, guidance and
traffic control [2], [6], [10]–[13]. Little research has so far
conducted on reliability and latency of the communication
system. This is probably due to the fact that the requirements
on trasmission reliability and latency, in many cases, are not
strigent and the number of AGVs is also small. However, the
situation will be different when a large number of AGVs are
deployed in a tightly scheduled industrial process. Complexity
of path planning increases exponentially with the number of
AGVs. Meamwhile, much more information will be exchanged
among AGVs and control system to guarantee stable and safe
operations of the whole system [14], [15]. In this case, the
reliability and latency of the communication system of AGVs
can no long be ignored.
As mentioned in [9], [10], long latency that introduced by
the nature of wireless communication system may cause se-
vere performance degradation. Reliability is another important
requirement [16]–[20]. Any erroneous packets may result in
unexpected damage to the equipment, and may even lead to a
breakdown of the whole system in extreme cases. Currently,
wireless technologies applied in most of AGVs are based
on existing general purpose communication standards without

adequate consideration on reliability and latency. Therefore, Host computer
this paper gives an overview of wireless technologies used AGV AGV
in AGVs. Then we analyzed the commonly used wireless
standards, namely ZigBee and IEEE 802.11, in existing AGVs
in terms of the reliability and latency performance. Based on Ă
the analysis, the future direction on the wireless technologies AGV AGV
in AGVs are presented, as well as call for collaboration from
the industrial and academic world.
This rest of paper is organized as follows. Section II gives UHF wireless
a survey of wireless technologies employed in AGVs in the interface adapter

past decades. Section III focuses on the performance analysis CAN bus
of ZigBee and IEEE 802.11 in terms of data rate, latency
and reliability for AGVs, followed by discussions on future Other Other Other
direction of wireless technologies in AGVs in Section IV. ĂĂ
devices devices devices
Finally, this paper is concluded in Section V.
II. Wireless Communication Technologies in AGVs Fig. 2. Wireless communications of AGVs based on CAN bus.
In general, two types of wireless control modes, namely
centralized and distributed coordination control, are applied in Host computer ZigBee network
AGVs for communications. A detailed survey on these two
modes is presented in this section.
Coordinator
A. Wireless Communications in Centralized Control of AGVs
In the early stage of AGVs’ deployment, the adopted
wireless technologies are usually simple. This is probably due
to the limited scale of AGVs, simple control function and
low data rate requirement. AGVs move along predefined paths
AGV AGV AGV
or tracks, and use Charge Coupled Device (CCD) cameras
or Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) for localization.
Through the transceiver modules on AGVs, the positioning
information is transmitted to a central control system. Based
on the positioning information collected from all AGVs, the AGV AGV AGV AGV
control system sends out command messages to the AGVs
after using a overall optimization perspective [21], [22]. Lately,
networking technologies are introduced to bridge wireless
communication and networks together, aiming to provide Fig. 3. Wireless communications of AGVs based on ZigBee network.
AGVs with more flexibility in different applications. More
importantly, this extension has opened a door to exploit
the powerful data processing capability of computers. With deployment, flexible expansion and good compatibility when
specially designed programs, a computer is able to supervise incorporating with other systems. Among these standards,
working states of each AGV for a cooperated task, and forecast ZigBee based on IEEE 802.15.4 and Wi-Fi based on IEEE
moving paths of an AGV to avoid possible conflicts and traffic 802.11 are two dominant standards in this domain [6], [10],
congestions [1], [10]. [18], [24], [25].
As shown in Figure 2, a fleet of AGVs is interconnected to A ZigBee based AGVs communication system is illustrated
the Controller Area Network (CAN) bus by using standardized in Figure 3. Each AGV is mounted with a ZigBee module as
interface cards and Ultra High Frequency (UHF) transceiver a node or a router, while a host computer is set as a control
modules [23]. This is a two-way wireless link that allows system. All AGVs are connected with each other to form a
information exchange between a host computer and AGVs. mesh network and communicate with the host computer via
Each time when a message is transmitted, the receiver replies a coordinator. By exchanging information with surrounding
an acknowledgement to confirm the arrival of the message. neighbors, each AGV is able to estimate its own position
In case of failure, the Automatic Repeat reQuest (ARQ) througn received signal strength or different localization algo-
mechanism is enabled for retransmission. rithms [11]. Due to the nature of self-organization of ZigBee
With the rapid development and popularization of wireless protocol, when an AGV is moving, the network topology
technologies, commercial wireless network standards are in- is also updated accordingly. As ZigBee is well known as a
creasingly applied in AGVs. These standards usually provide low rate and low cost solution, it is usually applied in the
a number of advantages to AGVs, such as low cost, fast applications where high data rate is not required.

 Host
computer
Wired LAN network

Coordinator Coordinator Coordinator

AGV AGV AGV AGV AGV AGV

Ă Ă Ă Ă

AGV AGV AGV AGV AGV AGV

Distributed ZigBee network Distributed ZigBee network Distributed ZigBee network

Fig. 5. ZigBee and LAN compounded wireless communications of AGVs using distributed control strategy.

for further processing. Subsequently, the host computer obtains

Host computer
AGV AGV the position information and replies corresponding command
packets to all AGVs to guide their movements.

B. Wireless Communications in Distributed Control of AGVs

AGV
WLAN
(IEEE 802.11)
AGV Ă AGV AGV AGV
Fig. 4. Wireless communications of AGVs based on WLAN (IEEE 802.11)
network.
For those high data rate applications, IEEE 802.11 and its
amended standards are more suitable for AGV systems [10],
[11], [26], [27]. Figure 4 shows the general topology of an
AGV system based on IEEE 802.11 standard. Different from
the ZigBee solution, the network topology using IEEE 802.11
is usually a star network, instead of mesh structure. Therefore,
in an IEEE 802.11 based AGV system, different localization
schemes are often applied rather than the signal strength
based method. An example is the proposal in [22], all AGVs
transmit their scanned RFID information to a host computer

Theoretically, the centralized wireless control approach can
achieve optimal performance to each AGVs from the perspec-
tive of global consideration, as all commands are determined
by one central controller. However, the distributed control
mode is preferred in practical industry applications [1], [3],
[14], [15]. The rationale behind is due to the following facts: i)
As the industrial production lines are becoming more complex,
a larger scale of AGVs are usually required to handle the
production processes. The real-time control of each AGV by
a single controller becomes extremely challenging, because
the computing complexity increases exponentially with the
increased number of AGVs. ii) In a dynamic industrial en-
vironment, AGVs have to deal with different complex tasks.
It is considered to be more efficient for AGVs to perform
the functions of localization, path re-planning and obstacle
avoidance via interaction with other AGVs instead of relying
on the central controller. With the rapid progress in both hard-
ware (sensors, embedded computing units and actuators) and
software (localization, path re-planning and obstacle avoidance
algorithms), AGVs are now capable to make decisions in an
intelligent, flexible and autonomous way by resorting to a
distributed control approach.
A general architecture of a ZigBee and Local Area Network
(LAN) compounded control system is shown in Figure 5 [24].
It is a hierarchical structure that AGVs in each ZigBee network
are interacted in a distributed manner, while the coordinators
are managed in a centralized way by the host computer.
Each AGV broadcasts its position and motion information
to the coordinator and other AGVs. The coordinator relays
the received message to a host computer through an RS-232
communication interface and wired Ethernet. Also, command
packets generated by the host computer are delivered to AGVs
in the same way (but with reverse direction). Viewed from the
topology structure, Figure 5 represents a paradigm of a Cyber-
Physical System (CPS) based control approach, in which
wireless/wire communications, network, computing, sensing,
control, etc. are tightly merged together to form a large scale
AGVs system for industry upgrade [3], [15].
There exists another type of distributed AGV systems de-
scribed as follow: the global map of a manufacturing plant
is divided into a number of small areas. Each area is treated
as a sector and is corresponded to a node of the map [14].
The number of AGVs in one sector is limited to a predefined
value, and each AGV’s information is transmitted and stored
in the node when it enters the corresponded sector. Moreover,
information in all nodes is managed in centralization mode
and is shared by all AGVs for interaction. But for the AGVs
in one sector, the distributed wireless control approach is
applied. By using Wireless Local Area Networks (WLAN)
for packets exchange, these AGVs negotiate to each other to
localize themselves, to re-plan paths, and to minimize traffic
congestion as possible as they can.
III. Performance Analysis of ZigBee and WLAN standards
As discussed in Section II, ZigBee and WLAN are the
two most commonly applied wireless network standards in
AGV systems due to the low cost, easy deployment and
compatibility features. However, most of the current research
works focus mainly on the topics of localization, path plan-
ning, traffic congestion control and obstacle avoidance. Little
disccsion can be found on the AGV wireless commmunication
technologies. Some researchers have already noticted that
latency and errors introduced by wireless commmunication
can significantly affect the overall performance of AGVs [6],
[9], [10]. Therefore, it is important to discuss the fundamental
reliability and latency performance of ZigBee and WLAN
from the perspective of an AGV system.
A. ZigBee standard analysis
ZigBee is a self-organized wireless network protocol to
provide low throughput and low power communications. The
physical and MAC layer of ZigBee are based on the standard
IEEE 802.15.4. It works at the unlicensed Industrial Scientific
Medical (ISM) frequency band, 868 MHz, 915 MHz and 2.4
GHz. The corresponding the data rates are 20 kbps, 40 kbps
and 250 kbps, respectively. Figure 6 presents the Presenta-
tion Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) format of IEEE 802.15.4
physical layer. On the physical layer, the direct sequence
spread spectrum (DSSS) access mode is used to improve
signal-to-noise Ratio (SNR) of received signals. On the MAC
layer, ZigBee uses Carrier Sense multiple Access-Collision

56-216 bits 16 bits
MAC header MAC footer
MAC data payload (MSDU)
(MHR) (MFR)
40 bits 8 bits
Synchronization PHY header
PHY payload (PSDU)
header (SHR) (PHR)
Physical layer PPDU
Fig. 6. PPDU format of ZigBee/IEEE 802.15.4 standard.
Avoidance (CSMA-CA) mechanism for channel access. It
supports mesh topologies, which means that ZigBee devices
may relay information for each other through multiple hops.
We do not intend to include every detail of ZigBee protocol,
but only focus on AGV systems related ZigBee functionalities.
In order to detect erroneous packets, ZigBee applies the
Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC) method on the MAC layer
for error detection. In case of corrupted packets, ZigBee
enables the ARQ mechanism. Specifically, any errors found
in a received packet trigeers a retransmission. Retransmissions
may take place several times until transmission succeeds or
reach the maximum allowed retransmission times. It is notable
that the time-consuming retransmission procedure introduces
random delay, which is not accepated in latency-sensitive
scenarios. More importantly, ZigBee does not apply any error
correction codes in the protocol, which indicates that even one
single bit error in a packet will trigger the retransmission of the
whole packet. Thus, both transmission efficiency and latency
suffer.
Besides the ARQ scheme, the CSMA-CA mechanism is
another factor that may prolong the transmission latency.
ZigBee can work either in beacon-enabled or in non-Beacon
mode. However, in both modes, the CSMA-CA is used for
channel contention access. If the channel is detected to be
idle by a ZigBee transmitter, following a random back-off,
the device will send its data. If the channel is found to be
occupied, the device waits for another random period before
trying to access the channel again until the channel is free. It
is obvious that this mechanism brings unpredictable delay to
the wireless transmissions.
B. WLAN standard analysis
IEEE 802.11x is a series of specificaions developed for
WLAN technologies. It defines an over-the-air inteface be-
tween a wireless node and an access point or between two
wireless nodes. There exist a number versions of 802.11
standards released in different years. Besides those widely
used versions in AGV systems, namely 802.11 a/b/g/n, another
three latest versions will be or can be also applied in AGV
systems: i) IEEE 802.11ac extends earlier 802.11 specifica-
tions, including 802.11n. It provides much higher data rate
of 433Mbps per spatial stream and has been already used in

802.11a
L-STF L-LTF L-SIG Data
802.11n
L-STF L-LTF L-SIG HT-SIG HT-STF HT-LTF Data
802.11ad
STF CEF Header Data AGC TRN
802.11ac
VHT- VHT- VHT- VHT-
L-STF L-LTF L-SIG Data
SIG-A STF LTF SIG-B
Fig. 7. PPDU format of IEEE 802.11 standards.
industrial applications; ii) IEEE 802.11ah, also known as Wi-
Fi HaLow, operates in frequency bands below one gigahertz
(900 MHz). Therefore, the wireless communication range is
much larger than other tranditional 802.11 versions. In addition
to its extended range, another key benefit for AGV systems is
better penetrattion ability. It is considerably easier for IEEE
802.11ah to penetrate walls and other barriers than other
WLAN standards; iii) IEEE 802.11ad, working in the 60 GHz
band, can theoretically achieve a maximum data rate of 7
Gbps. Due to the high frequency band, IEEE 802.11ad devices
may have to work in the case of line-of-sight (LOS), which
limits its communication range. But it can still be considered
in those applications where high throughput is required, such
as video monitering.
Similar to ZigBee, all subtypes of IEEE 802.11 standards
carry out the CSMA-CA protocal on the MAC layer. An
IEEE 802.11 device also keeps on listening to the wireless
medium before transmission. Only when the wireless medium
is idle the device starts transmitting. Therefore, it also has the
same issue of unpredictable delay caused by not guaranteed
wireless channel resources. Different from ZigBee, all versions
of IEEE 802.11 use channel coding to counteract the negative
effect of channel noise, which is presented in Table I. Due
to the error correction scheme, a packet containing a small
proportion of errors can be recovered to avoid unnecessary re-
transmissions. As the number of retransmission decreases, the
latency perforamance can also be greatly improved. However,
some of these error correction codes are originally designed
for long packets. The error correction performance may be
degraded when short packets being transmitted. For example,
Low Density Parity Check (LDPC) codes will suffer from
serious error floor when the packets length is not long enough.
Pulse interference in industrial environment are all important
factors that should be carefully addressed [38].
IV. Trends and Directions for Wireless Networks in AGVs
As we described the current status of wireless networks in
existing AGV systems, in this section, we will firstly sum-

TABLE I
Channel coding used in IEEE 802.11 wireless communication standards
Year Standard Channel codes Year Standard Channel codes
1999 IEEE CC 2012 IEEE LDPC
802.11a 802.11ad
2009 IEEE CC, LDPC 2013 IEEE CC, LDPC
802.11n 802.11ac
marize the characteristics of wireless networks in AGVs and
then discuss the future directions of wireless communications
in AGV systems.
A. Characteristics of Wireless Communications in AGVs
Among different characteristics of wireless networks, high
reliability and low latency, as well as short packets are usually
emphasized when we talk about AGV systems, which we have
emphasized many times in this paper.
• High reliability: In AGV systems, each AGV continuous-
ly sends its status to the control system. After processing
the information, the controller replies the corresponding
commands back to the AGV for actions. Transmission
failure will lead to disturbances to the process, degrade
the quality of control and may damage the system and
cause ecomonic losses. As reported in [29], the Packet
Error Rate (PER) in industrial control applications is on
the order of 10−6 − 10−9 , which is necessary to maintain
stable operation of the controlled system. Unfortunatelly,
industrial environments are usually harsh, such as high
temperature, high vibration, moving equipment, concrete
and metallic constructions, as well as electromagnetic
disturbances. Therefore, wireless communications in in-
dustrial environments are prone to errors.
• Low latency: In a highly automated production line, a
large number of AGVs are tightly coordinated with each
other to achieve complex tasks. On one hand, the control
system must refresh the information of each AGV very
frequently for the purpose of accurate state supervision
and action control. On the other hand, each AGV also
needs to frequently exchange information with the control
system and other AGVs to perceive changes around.
High data refresh rate indicates short deadline. If any
information fails to arrive at its destination within its
deadline, the transmission fails as well. Therefore, same
safety and economic consequence will also occurs as
corrupted messages.
• Short packets: In the nature of itself, wireless communica-
tions of AGVs belongs to machine-type communications.
Packet exchanged among AGV’s and control systems are
parameters of position, moving, working state, manage-
ment, etc., which can be included in a few hundred bits.
Therefore, short packets represent the most common form
of traffic generated by AGVs.
It is worth pointing out that these factors may be mutually
restricted. As we discussed before, ARQ mechanism is able to
improve reliability by resending original information, but the
latency is also prolonged.

B. Directions for Wireless Communications in AGVs
To satisfy the low latency, high reliability and short pack-
ets requirements in CPS-based wireless control networks for
AGVs, currently employed wireless standards need to be
optimized, and some promising solutions should be taken
into account. From the perspective of practical applications,
we present some progresses regarding to industrial wireless
control, which may suitable for future researches of AGVs.
Since IEEE 802.15.4 standard is a low throughput wireless
communication standard, the limited performance only apply
to centralized AGVs cases, it is not included here for further
discussion.
• Customization of IEEE 802.11 standard: Although IEEE
802.11 standard has been already used in CPS-based
AGVs, as analyzed in previous sections, high reliability
and low latency can hardly be guaranteed. To fulfill the
requirements, customization of IEEE 802.11 standard is
an option [30]. There are several possible solutions: i)
optimization of the MAC layer: since CSMA-CA mechas-
nism introduces unpredictable delays, to provide the
deterministic communication, other schemes combined
with CSMA-CA, such as TDMA, can be applied; ii) uti-
lization of other error correction codes suitable for short
packets: promising coding schemes include convolutional
codes (CC), Reed-Solomon (RS) codes, and some non-
binary variants of LDPC codes; iii) optimization of PPDU
structure. The advantages of shortening the overheads is
not only to improve transmission efficiency, but also to
decrease the packet error rate (PER) due to fewer bits in
one packets.
• MTCs in 5G: With the envision of Internet of Things
(IOTs) by the academic and industrial world, the fifth
generation (5G) cellular standard is emerged as a revo-
lution by including everything into a mutual-interacted
network. At the early stage of 5G, MTCs has been
considered as an indispensable application. For this pur-
pose, the strict latency and reliability requirements are
aimed to achieve much better performance than previous
generation. To reduce latency, frame structure in the
physical layer is simplified to shorten duration of the
OFDM symbols. The reliability is also enhanced by using
both CC and diversity, as CC outperforms other coding
schemes for short packets transmission, the convolutional
coding structure also superior to block codes in terms of
encoding/decoding latency. On the other hand, the use of
diversity in spatial and frequency is a also powerful tool
to resist channel noise and fading.
• High performance wireless communications: Aiming to
meet the stringent requirements of wireless control for
critical applications, High Performance Wireless (Wire-
lessHP) communications represents the latest progress,
as this proposal pursues multi-Gbps throughput and 10
μs latency for industrial wireless control scenarios [28],
[31], [32]. Differ from conventionally adopted strategy,
where commercial wireless communication standards are

customized to satisfy a set of special requirements in
industrial scenarios, WirelessHP is a completely different
protocol aiming at industrial wireless control applications.
At first, the preamble length in the physical layer is
designed with a short duration of one OFDM symbol,
by which overall duration of one OFDM data frame is
47.6 us for BPSK, and 20.4 us for 8 Phase Shift Keying
(8PSK) modulation, on conditions of the central frequen-
cy of 866.5 MHz and bandwidth of 5 MHz for 104 bits
packet length. Moreover, the time duration can be further
reduced when a higher central frequency is used. Sec-
ondly, WirelessHP has a tightly scheduled traffic pattern.
At predefined time slots, each node transmitting/receiving
packets periodically. The data refresh rate can up to
105 Hz for 102 − 103 nodes, which is fast enough to
keep close supervision of each node. Thirdly, WirelessHP
physical layer has adopted diversity and channel coding
to guarantee ultra-high reliability, i.e., to 10−9 level for
PER performance. A number of coding schemes, such
as RS and CC concatenated codes, non-binary LDPC
codes, LDPC-CC codes and RS based LDPC codes, are
currently been considered for short packets transmission,
as these codes have been reported can achieve better
performance than traditional CC, binary LDPC codes
and Turbo codes [33]–[37]. With the development and
implementation of WirelessHP standard, it may be a
very promising candidate for wireless communications in
AGVs.
V. Conclusions
With the rapid deployment of AGVs in modern industry
processes, wireless communications among AGVs and control
system has emerged as an important chain to pursue lower
cost, higher production efficiency and much flexible deploy-
ment. In this paper, a survey of the widely employed wireless
communication technologies in current AGVs is given, from
RFID to IEEE 802.11. Viewed from the future requirements
of wireless control in CPS-based AGVs, we argued that new
communication standards should be highlighted, as ultra-high
reliability and low latency are becoming bottleneck issues for
the large-scale application of AGVs in Industry 4.0. In this
regard, we discussed and suggested three promising solutions
for future researches, namely Customization of IEEE 802.11
standard, MTCs in 5G and high performance wireless commu-
nications (WirelessHP), and call for collaboration from AGVs
community in this field.
Acknowledgment
The authors thank the anonymous reviewers for their valu-
able comments to improve the presentation of this paper.
References
[1] D. H. Perez and H. M. Barbera, “Modeling distributed transportation
systems composed of flexible automated guided vehicles in flexible
manufacturing systems,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics,
vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 166-180, May 2010.
 [2] F. Oleari, M. Magnani, D. Ronzoni, L. Sabattini, E. Cardarelli, V. Digani,
C. Secchi and C. Fantuzzi, “Improving AGV systems: Integration of
advanced sensing and control technologies,” in 2015 IEEE International
Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing
(ICCP), Cluj Napoca, Romania, Sep. 2015, pp. 257-262.
[3] I. Draganjac, D. Miklic, Z. Kovacic, G. Vasiljevic and S. Bogdan,
“Decentralized control of multi-AGV systems in autonomous ware-
housing applications,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and
Engineering, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1433-1447, Oct. 2016.
[4] E. Cardarelli, L. Sabattini, C. Secchi and C. Fantuzzi, “Multisensor data
fusion for obstacle detection in automated factory logistics,” in 2014
IEEE 10th International Conference on intelligent computer communi-
cation and processing (ICCP), Cluj Napoca, Romania, Oct. 2014, pp.
221-226.
[5] P. Beinschob and C. Reinke, “Graph SLAM based mapping for AGV
localization in large-scale warehouses,” in 2015 IEEE International
Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing
(ICCP), Cluj Napoca, Romania, Sep. 2015, pp. 245-248.
[6] D. M. Tavares and S. J. Bachega, “Proposal for an AGV communication
system using a cellbot framework,” in 2012 10th IEEE/IAS International
Conference on Industry Applications, Fortaleza, Brazil, Nov. 2012, pp.
1-6.
[7] L. Sabattini, V. Digani, C. Secchi, G. Cotena, D. Ronzoni, M. Foppoli
and F. Oleari, “Technological roadmap to boost the introduction of
AGVs in industrial applications,” in 2013 IEEE 9th International Con-
ference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing (ICCP),
Cluj Napoca, Romania, Sep. 2013, 203-208.
[8] E. Cardarelli, L. Sabattini, V. Digani, C. Secchi and C. Fantuzzi,
“Interacting with a multi AGV system,” in 2015 IEEE International
Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing
(ICCP), Cluj Napoca, Sep. 2015, pp. 263-267.
[9] I. Tejado, B. M. Vinagre and J. I. Suarez, “Effects of a communication
network on the longitudinal and lateral control of an AGV,” in 2008
IEEE International Symposium on Industrial Electronics, Cambridge,
UK, Jul. 2008, pp. 2084-2089.
[10] C. Lozoya, P. Marti, M. Velasco and J. M. Fuertes, “Effective real-
time wireless control of an autonomous guided vehicle,” in 2007 IEEE
International Symposium on Industrial Electronics, Vigo, Spain, June
2007, pp. 2876-2881.
[11] S. L. X. Francis, S. G. Anavatti and M. Garratt, “Real time cooperative
path planning for multi-autonomous vehicles,” in 2013 International
Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informat-
ics (ICACCI), Mysore, India, Aug. 2013, pp. 1053-1057.
[12] C. Reinke and P. Beinschob, “Strategies for contour-based self-
localization in large-scale modern warehouses,” in 2013 IEEE 9th
International Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and
Processing (ICCP), Cluj Napoca, Romania, Sep. 2013, pp. 223-227.
[13] V. Digani, F. Caramaschi, L. Sabattini, C. Secchi and C. Fantuzzi, “Ob-
stacle avoidance for industrial AGVs,” in 2014 IEEE 10th International
Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing
(ICCP), Cluj Napoca, Romania, Sep. 2014, pp. 227-232.
[14] V. Digani, L. Sabattini, C. Secchi and C. Fantuzzi, “Towards decen-
tralized coordination of multi robot systems in industrial environments:
A hierarchical traffic control strategy,” in 2013 IEEE 9th International
Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing
(ICCP), Cluj Napoca, Romania, Sep. 2013, pp. 209-215.
[15] Y. Zhang, Z. Zhu and J. Lv, “CPS-Based smart control model for
shopfloor material handling,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informat-
ics, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1764-1775, Apr. 2018.
[16] S. Hoshino and J. Ota, “Design of an automated transportation system
in a seaport container terminal for the reliability of operating robots,”
in 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems, San Diego, CA, USA, Nov. 2007, pp. 4259-4264.
[17] H. Fazlollahtabar and M. Zandieh, “Cost optimization in an AGV-based
automated manufacturing system associated with product inspection
and machine reliability,” in 2010 Second International Conference on
Engineering System Management and Applications, Sharjah, United
Arab Emirates, Apr. 2010, pp. 1-6.
[18] J. Lategahn, M. Müller and C. Röhrig, “Global localization of automated
guided vehicles in wireless networks,” in 2012 IEEE 1st International
Symposium on Wireless Systems (IDAACS-SWS), Offenburg, Germany,
Sep. 2012, pp. 7-12.
[19] Y. Guangyong, C. Lin and C. Shan, “An error correction method with
adaptive time slot for AGV’s magnet-induced marker sensor,” in 2016

International Conference on Computer, Information and Telecommuni-
cation Systems (CITS), Kunming, China, Jul. 2016, pp. 1-4.
[20] M. H. F. A. Hazza, A. N. B. A. Bakar, E. Y. T. Adesta and A. H. Taha,
“Empirical study on AGV guiding in indoor manufacturing system using
color sensor,” in 2017 5th International Symposium on Computational
and Business Intelligence (ISCBI), Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Oct.
2017, pp. 125-128.
[21] T. Rupp, T. Cord, R. Lohnert and D. E. Lazic, “Positioning and commu-
nication system for autonomous guided vehicles in indoor environment,”
in 9th Mediterranean Electrotechnical Conference, Tel-Aviv, Israel, May
1998, pp. 187-191.
[22] J. H. Cho and M. W. Cho, “Effective position tracking using B-spline
surface equation based on wireless sensor networks and passive UHF-
RFID,” IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol.
62, no. 9, pp. 2456-2464, Sep. 2013.
[23] V. K. Kongezos and C. R. Allen, “Wireless communication between
AGVs (autonomous guided vehicles) and the industrial network CAN
(controller area network),” in Proceedings 2002 IEEE International
Conference on Robotics and Automation, Washington DC, USA, May
2002, pp. 434-437.
[24] J. P. Ko, J. W. Jung, J. W. Jeon, “Anti-collision method for AGV using
RFID and ZigBee network,” in 2013 13th International Conference
on Control, Automation and Systems (ICCAS 2013), Gwangju, South
Korea, Oct. 2013, pp. 599-604.
[25] G. Zhang and Z. Pan, “The application research of mobile robots
and wireless sensor network in laser automatic guided vehicles,” in
2011 Third International Conference on Measuring Technology and
Mechatronics Automation, Shangshai, China, Jan. 2011, pp. 708-711.
[26] K. C. Lee and S. Lee, “Integrated network of Profibus-DP and IEEE
802.11 wireless LAN with hard real-time requirement,” in 2001 IEEE
International Symposium on Industrial Electronics Proceedings, Pusan,
South Korea, Jun. 2001, pp. 1484-1489.
[27] G. Dini and F. Giurlanda, “A new neighborhood monitoring protocol for
co-ordination of multi-AGVs,” in the 2010 International Conference on
Computer Engineering & Systems, Cairo, Egypt, Dec. 2010, pp. 79-84.
[28] M. Luvisotto, Z. Pang, D. Dzung, M. Zhan and X. Jiang, “Physical layer
design of high performance wireless transmission for critical control
applications,”IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 13, no.
6, pp. 2844-2854, May 2017.
[29] H. G. Erhardt, “Real time requirements in industrial automation,” ETSI
Wireless Factory Starter Group, Oct. 2009.
[30] F. Tramarin, S. Vitturi, M. Luvisotto and A. Zanella, “On the use of
IEEE 802.11n for industrial communications,” IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Informatics, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1877-1886, Oct. 2016.
[31] M. Luvisotto, Z. Pang and D. Dzung, “Ultra high performance wire-
less control for critical applications: Challenges and directions,” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 14481459,
Jun. 2017.
[32] Z. Pang, M. Luvisotto and D. Dzung, “Wireless high-performance
communications: the challenges and opportunities of a new target,” IEEE
Industrial Electronics Magazine, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 20-25, Sep. 2017.
[33] Y. Li and M. Salehi “An efficient decoding algorithm for concatenated
RS-convolutional codes,” in 2009 43rd Annual Conference on Infor-
mation Sciences and Systems, Baltimore, MD, USA, Mar. 2009, pp.
411413.
[34] B. Y. Chang, D. Divsalar and L. Dolecek, “Non-binary protographbased
LDPC codes for short block-lengths,” in 2012 IEEE Information Theory
Workshop, Lausanne, Switzerland, Sep. 2012, pp. 282286.
[35] N. Zhang, M. N. A. Rahim, B. N. Vellambi and K. D. Nguyen, “Anytime
characteristics of protograph-based LDPC convolutional codes,” IEEE
Transactions on Communications, vol. 64, no. 10, pp. 40574069, Oct.
2016.
[36] I. Djurdjevic, J. Xu, K. A. Ghaffar and S. Lin, “A class of low density
parity check codes constructed based on Reed-Solomon codes with two
information symbols,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 7, no. 7, pp.
317319, Jul. 2003.
[37] S. I. Hwang and H. Lee, “Block-circulant RS-LDPC code: Code
construction and efficient decoder design,” IEEE Transactions on Very
Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 13371341,
Jul. 2013.
[38] J. T. Tengdin, K. Fodero and R. Schwartz, “Ensuring error-free perfor-
mance of communications equipment,” SEL Journal of Reliable Power,
vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 411, Aug. 2012.