rf code presentation to t-20 standards committee
TRANSCRIPT
RF Code
Presentation
To
T-20 Standards Committee
Presentation Outline
• RF Code Overview & Product
• RTLS Markets
• RTLS Technology Comparison
• Summary & Proposal
RF Code Product Family
TagTracker Softwareo Real-time data collectiono Scalable system
architectureo Standards based
Readero Wireless connectivityo High tag throughput
Tago Low Costo Small
Handheld Locator o Mobile Platform for finding assets
Example RF Code Customers
RTLS Vendors
• Over the last few years there has been a dramatic growth of RTLS vendors each with distinct technology and product features.
… and there are more…
Current RTLS Technologies• Location derived through:
– Beacon– Beacon with Location Reference Devices– Location Transponders– Differential Time of Arrival– Space Time Focusing Systems– More coming on line:
• Narrow pulse• UWB
• Functionality tradeoffs:– Tag Cost– Location accuracy– Ability to detect movement through threshold or portal– Tag density– Infrastructure complexity– Infrastructure cost– Bidirectional communications
Active Beacon Tags
• Tag Cost Good (<$5 in quantity; <$3 achievable)
• Tag Density Good (100,000’s tags/location; 1-10 second beacons)
• Threshold Detection Poor (Dictated by resolution)
• Resolution Medium +/- 25 feet common +/- 10 feet achieved Resolution is algorithm dependent
• Other attributes:– Inexpensive and simple infrastructure– Handheld locators allow for improved resolution (+/-18 inches)– No ability to write to tag
Reader
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
100m
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
To “System”
T3
High Frequency Range:0 – 300m
Tags
Reader
Location Reference
Device
Low Frequency Range :0 – 3.5m
T1
T2 To Server
Active Beacon Tags With Location Reference Device
• Tag Cost Good (<$5 in quantity; <$3 possible)
• Tag Density Good (100,000’s tags/location; 1-10 second beacons)
• Threshold Detection Excellent (Using H field LRD’s)
• Resolution Good (Two modes: Coarse +/- 10-25 feet, Fine: +/- 18 inches)
• Other attributes:– Inexpensive infrastructure– Handheld locators allow for improved resolution in coarse zone areas (+/- 18 inches)– Ability to write to a tag– Long range
Location Transponders
Reader
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
100m
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
To “System”
• Tag Cost Poor (<$20 in quantity; <$10 possible)
• Tag Density Medium (10,000’s tags/location; 10-60 second beacon rate)
• Threshold Detection Poor (Requires +/- 6 inch resolution; beyond current state of the art & FCC limits)
• Resolution Good (+/- 10 feet practical; +/- 3 feet achievable)
• Other attributes:– Single antenna yields a distance– Expensive infrastructure but not as complex as DTOA– Ability to write to tags long range– Handheld locators not practical– Range versus resolution tradeoff
DTOA Systems
Reader
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
100m
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
To “System”
• Tag Cost Poor (<$20 in quantity; <$10 possible)
• Tag Density Poor (1,000’s tags/location; 5-10 minute beacons)
• Threshold Detection Poor (Requires +/- 6 inch resolution; beyond current state of the art & FCC limits)
• Resolution Good (+/- 10 feet practical; +/- 3 feet achievable)
• Other attributes:– Expensive & complex infrastructure– No ability to write to tags (at least not long range)– Handheld locators not practical– Range versus resolution tradeoff
Space Time Focusing Systems
Reader
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
1000m
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
TaggedAsset
To “System”
• Tag Cost Good (<$5 for Passive)
• Tag Density Good (100,000’s tags/location; 5-10 second beacon rate)
• Threshold Detection Good (+/- 18 inches)
• Resolution Medium (+/- 18 inches)
• Other attributes:– Targeted for outdoor use– Handheld locators not practical
RTLS Technology Comparison
Legend: 1 is Bad10 is Good
Tag Cost
64
108
35
1
02468
1012
Imple
men
tatio
n A
Imple
men
tatio
n B
Imple
men
tatio
n C
Imple
men
tatio
n D
Imple
men
tatio
n E
Imple
men
tatio
n F
GPS
Tag Resolution
10
68
56
42
02468
1012
Tag Density
53
78
56
10
02468
1012
Threshold Detection
10
4
89
43
1
02468
1012
Imple
men
tatio
n A
Imple
men
tatio
n B
Imple
men
tatio
n C
Imple
men
tatio
n D
Imple
men
tatio
n E
Imple
men
tatio
n F
GPS
The RTLS Markets
Asset TrackingManufacturing
Supply ChainTheme Parks
What does that mean to the marketplace?
ThemePark
Implementation B
Implementation C
Implementation D
Implementation E
Implementation F
GPS
Implementation A
Manufacturing
WIPSupplyChain
AssetTracking
Legend: Technology is an excellent fit to the applicationTechnology has some issues for the applicationTechnology has major issues for the application
State of RTLS Market
RTLS ENCOMPASSES A RANGE OF APPLICATIONS BEST SERVED THROUGH A RANGE OF TECHNOLOGIES
Proposal
High PrecisionRTLS
Low PrecisionRTLS
Current RFIDStandardsGPS
Common API, Address And Data FormatCommon API, Address And Data Format
ASP’sIndependent
SoftwareVendor Solutions
Customer SpecificSolutions
WinWinCECE PalmPalm WAPWAP PCPC
Summary & Proposal• Summary
– There are multiple technology approaches• Each makes a tradeoff in key functionality areas
– The market has not selected a clear leader– The market is likely to select multiple technologies based on
application
• Proposal– Segment the technologies to reflect the applications– Bridge the gap between current RFID standards and RTLS
• API• Address Level• Data Level