Internet of Things on Power Line Communications: An Experimental Performance Analysis

  • Luca DavoliEmail author
  • Luca Veltri
  • Gianluigi Ferrari
  • Umberto Amadei
Part of the Energy Systems in Electrical Engineering book series (ESIEE)


The giant information exchange enabled by the Internet of Things (IoT) paradigm, i.e. by a “network of networks” of smart and connected devices, will likely exploit electrical lines as a ready-to-use infrastructure. Power Line Communications (PLC) have received a significant attention in the last decade, as electrical lines are not used as simple energy supply media, but as information carriers. Among the different aspects of PLC-based architectures, an interesting and important analysis have to be reserved to security aspects that should be adopted in similar infrastructures, having that they are crucial to deliver trustworthy and reliable systems and, hence, to support users relying on available services, especially in case in which they should be inherently secure at the physical level (e.g. against unauthorised signal removal/interruption and eavesdropping, since they are difficult and dangerous). Motivated by the relevant impact of PLC on IoT, in this chapter we investigate experimentally the performance of IoT systems on PLC in indoor environments, considering a vendor-provided application tool and a self-developed Java library. The experimental tests are carried out on both cold and hot electrical lines, evaluating both fixed-size and variable-length power lines. Our results show that IoT-oriented PLC can reach a throughput of 8 kbps on a 300-m cold line and of 6 kbps on a 300-m hot line. Further experimental efforts will be oriented to performance analyses in presence of the adoption of security measures.


IoT PLC Performance Experimental analysis Smart grid 



The authors would like to thank Xiaolin Lu, Wonsoo Kim, Ariton Xhafa and Andrew Soukup (Texas Instruments Research Center, Dallas, TX, USA) for the fundamental support and useful discussions.


  1. 1.
    V.C. Gungor et al., Smart grid technologies: communication technologies and standards. IEEE Trans. Industr. Inf. 7(4), 529–539 (2011). Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. Jeschke et al., Industrial internet of things and cyber manufacturing systems, in Industrial Internet of Things: Cybermanufacturing Systems (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2016), pp. 3–19.
  3. 3.
    M. Hermann et al., Design principles for Industries 4.0 scenarios, in 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 3928–3937.
  4. 4.
    G3-PLC Alliance. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  5. 5.
    S. Cirani et al., A scalable and self-configuring architecture for service discovery in the internet of things. IEEE Internet Things J. 1(5), 508–521 (2014). Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. Belli et al., A scalable big stream cloud architecture for the internet of things. Int. J. Syst. Service-Oriented Eng. 5(4), 26–53 (2015). Scholar
  7. 7.
    K. De Craemer, G. Deconinck, Analysis of state-of-the-art smart metering communication standards, in Proceedings of the 5th Young Researchers Symposium. Accessed 19 Jan 2017
  8. 8.
    Z. Shelby et al., The constrained application protocol (CoAP). RFC 7252, Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  9. 9.
    S. Cirani et al., CoSIP: a constrained session initiation protocol for the internet of things, in Advances in Service-Oriented and Cloud Computing. ESOCC 2013. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 393, pp. 13–24, Sept 2013.
  10. 10.
    S. Cirani et al., Performance evaluation of a SIP-based constrained peer-to-peer overlay, in 2014 International Conference on High Performance Computing Simulation (HPCS), Bologna, pp. 432–435, July 2014.
  11. 11.
    L. Belli et al., Design and deployment of an IoT application-oriented testbed. IEEE Comput. 48(9), 32–40 (2015). Scholar
  12. 12.
    European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  13. 13.
    Association of Radio Industries and Businesses (ARIB). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  14. 14.
    Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Accessed 19 Jan 2018
  15. 15.
    China Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  16. 16.
    Texas Instruments: Power Line Communications. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  17. 17.
    Maxim Integrated: Powerline Communications. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  18. 18.
    STMicroelectronics: Power Line Transceivers. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  19. 19.
    PRIME Alliance. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  20. 20.
    HomePlug Alliance. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  21. 21.
    V. Oksman, J. Zhang, G.HNEM: the new ITU-T standard on narrowband PLC technology. IEEE Commun. Mag. 49(12), 36–44 (2011). Scholar
  22. 22.
    IEEE P1901.2 Standard. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  23. 23.
    Texas Instruments: TI PLC Development Kit Design Guide. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  24. 24.
    Texas Instruments: Developing a Flexible PLC Implementation for Worldwide Deployment. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  25. 25.
    E. Ancillotti et al., The role of communication systems in smart grids: architectures, technical solutions and research challenges. Comput. Commun. 36(17–18), 1665–1697 (2013). Scholar
  26. 26.
    N. Bui et al., The internet of energy: a web-enabled smart grid system. IEEE Network 26(4), 39–45 (2012). Scholar
  27. 27.
    Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). URL (accessed January 19, 2018)
  28. 28.
    European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  29. 29.
    World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  30. 30.
    S. Galli et al., For the grid and through the grid: the role of power line communications in the smart grid. Proc. IEEE 99(6), 998–1027 (2011). Scholar
  31. 31.
    S. Salsano et al., PMSR—Poor Man’s segment routing, a minimalistic approach to segment routing and a traffic engineering use case, in 2016 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS 2016), pp. 598–604 (2016).
  32. 32.
    M. Hoch, Comparison of PLC G3 and PRIME, in 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Power Line Communications and Its Applications (ISPLC), pp. 165–169 (2011).
  33. 33.
    H.C. Ferreira et al., Power line communications: theory and applications for narrowband and broadband communications over power lines (2010).
  34. 34.
    B. Masood, S. Baig, Standardization and deployment scenario of next generation NB-PLC technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 65, 1033–1047 (2016). Scholar
  35. 35.
    T.A. Papadopoulos et al., Application of narrowband power-line communication in medium-voltage smart distribution grids. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 28(2), 981–988 (2013). Scholar
  36. 36.
    M. Sayed, N. Al-Dhahir, Narrowband-PLC/wireless diversity for smart grid communications, in 2014 IEEE Global Communications Conference, pp. 2966–2971 (2014).
  37. 37.
    K. Razazian, J. Yazdani, CENELEC and powerline communication specification in realization of smart grid technology, in 2011 2nd IEEE PES International Conference and Exhibition on Innovative Smart Grid Technologies, pp. 1–7 (2011).
  38. 38.
    B. Adebisi et al., Narrowband PLC channel modelling for smart grid applications, in 2014 9th International Symposium on Communication Systems, Networks Digital Sign (CSNDSP), pp. 67–72 (2014).
  39. 39.
    H. Kellerbauer, H. Hirsch, Simulation of powerline communication with OMNeT++ and INET-framework, in 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Power Line Communications and Its Applications (ISPLC), pp. 213–217 (2011).
  40. 40.
    Discrete Event Simulator: OMNeT++. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  41. 41.
    D.P.F. Miller, H. Vakilzadian, Ubiquitous networks: power line communication and internet of things in smart home environments, in IEEE International Conference on Electro/Information Technology, pp. 596–601 (2014).
  42. 42.
    Q. Ou et al., Application of internet of things in smart grid power transmission, in 2012 Third FTRA International Conference on Mobile, Ubiquitous, and Intelligent Computing (MUSIC), pp. 96–100 (2012).
  43. 43.
    X. Chen et al., Application of internet of things in power-line monitoring, in International Conference on Cyber-Enabled Distributed Computing and Knowledge Discovery, pp. 423–426 (2012).
  44. 44.
    Y. Zhen et al., Study of architecture of power internet of things, in IET International Conference on Communication Technology and Application (ICCTA 2011), pp. 718–722 (2011).
  45. 45.
    A. Hosseinpour et al., Security and feasibility of power line communication system, in Global Security, Safety and Sustainability: Tomorrow’s Challenges of Cyber Security, pp. 244–251 (2015).
  46. 46.
    L. Davoli et al., Integration of Wi-Fi mobile nodes in a web of things testbed,” ICT Exp. Special Issue ICT Convergence Internet Things (IoT) 2(3), 96–99 (2016).
  47. 47.
    R. Gustavsson, Security issues and power line communication, in International Symposium on Power Line Communications and Its Applications (ISPLC), pp. 311–318 (2011). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  48. 48.
    L. Chhaya et al., Wireless sensor network based smart grid communications: cyber attacks, intrusion detection system and topology control. Electronics 6(1) (2017).
  49. 49.
    C. Montenegro et al., Transmission of IPv6 packets over IEEE 802.15.4 networks, in RFC 4944, The Internet Engineering Task Force (2007). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  50. 50.
    Official IEEE 802.11 Working Group (WG) Project Timelines. Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  51. 51.
    K. Pahlavan, P. Krishnamurthy, IEEE 802.3 ethernet, in Networking Fundamentals: Wide, Local and Personal Area Communications, pp. 656 (2009).
  52. 52.
    L. Belli et al., An open-source cloud architecture for big stream IoT applications, in Interoperability and Open-Source Solutions for the Internet of Things, pp. 73–88 (2015).
  53. 53.
    L. Davoli et al., An anonymization protocol for the internet of things, in 2017 International Symposium on Wireless Communication Systems (ISWCS), pp. 459–464 (2017).
  54. 54.
    L. Davoli et al., THORIN: an efficient module for federated access and threat mitigation in big stream cloud architectures. IEEE Cloud Comput. PP (99), 1–1.
  55. 55.
    C. De Laat et al., Generic AAA architecture, in RFC 2903 (The Internet Engineering Task Force, 2000). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  56. 56.
    L. Belli et al., Applying security to a big stream cloud architecture for the internet of things. Int. J. Distrib. Syst. Technol. 7(1), 37–58 (2016). Scholar
  57. 57.
    J. Heo et al., Identity-based mutual device authentication schemes for PLC system, in 2008 IEEE International Symposium on Power Line Communications and Its Applications (ISPLC), pp. 47–51 (2008).
  58. 58.
    J.S. Lee et al., A comparative study of wireless protocols: Bluetooth, UWB, ZigBee, and Wi-Fi, in IECON 2007—33rd Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, pp. 46–51 (2007).
  59. 59.
    L. Davoli et al., From micro to macro IoT: challenges and solutions in the integration of IEEE 802.15.4/802.11 and sub-GHz technologies. IEEE Internet Things J. PP (1), 1–1 (2017).
  60. 60.
    S. Frankel et al., The AES-CBC cipher algorithm and its use with IPsec, in RFC 3602 (The Internet Engineering Task Force, 2003). Accessed 19 Jan 2018
  61. 61.
    K. Moriarty et al., PKCS #1: RSA cryptography specifications Version 2.2, in RFC 8017 (The Internet Engineering Task Force, 2016). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  62. 62.
    F.J.S. Miravalles, Opera 2: standardization of broadband PLC, in 2007 IEEE International Symposium on Power Line Communications and Its Applications, pp. 11–11 (2007).
  63. 63.
    G. Corral et al., Security in OPERA specification based PLC systems, in 2010 Sixth Advanced International Conference on Telecommunications, pp. 474–478 (2010).
  64. 64.
    E. Rescorla, Diffie-Hellman key agreement method, in RFC 2631 (The Internet Engineering Task Force, 1999). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  65. 65.
    S. Kelly, Security implications of using the data encryption standard (DES), in RFC 4772 (The Internet Engineering Task Force, 2006). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  66. 66.
    National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  67. 67.
    European Commission (EC)—SMARTGRIDS-ETPS, (2017). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  68. 68.
    European Commission (EC)—OPEN METER (2017). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  69. 69.
    International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). Accessed 19 Jan 2018
  70. 70.
    Dun and Bradstreet—What is a Dun and Bradstreet D-U-N-S Number? (2017). Accessed 19 Jan 2018
  71. 71.
    N. Pavlidou et al., Power line communications: state of the art and future trends. IEEE Commun. Mag. 41(4), 34–40 (2003).
  72. 72.
    S. Kim et al., A secure smart-metering protocol over power-line communication. IEEE Trans. Power Delivery 26(4), 2370–2379 (2011). Scholar
  73. 73.
    A. Pittolo, A.M. Tonello, Physical layer security in power line communication networks, in Physical and Data-Link Security Techniques for Future Communication Systems, pp. 125–144 (2016).
  74. 74.
    A. Pittolo, A.M. Tonello, Physical layer security in power line communication networks: an emerging scenario, other than wireless. IET Commun. 8(8), 1239–1247 (2014). Scholar
  75. 75.
    M. Esmalifalak et al., Bad data injection attack and defense in electricity market using game theory study. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 4(1), 160–169 (2013). Scholar
  76. 76.
    S. Dudek, HomePlugAV PLC: practical attacks and backdooring (2014). Accessed 19 Jan 2018
  77. 77.
    W. Ahn et al., Development of cyber-attack scenarios for nuclear power plants using scenario graphs. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 11(9) (2015).
  78. 78.
    J.R. Lindsay, Stuxnet and the limits of cyber warfare. Secur. Stud. 22(3), 365–404 (2013). Scholar
  79. 79.
    J. Loeb, Researchers warn of biggest cyber threat to power grids since Stuxnet (2017). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  80. 80.
    Texas Instruments—TMDSPLCKIT-V3—C2000 Power Line Modem Developer’s Kit (2017). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  81. 81.
    Texas Instruments—Developing robust power line communications (PLC) with G3 (2017). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  82. 82.
    A. Sokolov, Java simple serial connector (JSSC) (2017). Accessed 18 Jan 2018
  83. 83.
    Texas Instruments—TMDSDC3359—Data Concentrator Evaluation Module (2017). Accessed 18 Jan 2018

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luca Davoli
    • 1
    Email author
  • Luca Veltri
    • 1
  • Gianluigi Ferrari
    • 1
  • Umberto Amadei
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Engineering and ArchitectureUniversity of ParmaParmaItaly
  2. 2.Tesmec Automation SrlFidenzaItaly

Personalised recommendations